Free speech is like the most important concept in the world

It lets you know who the people are that have bad views and opinions

Let’s the whole world slowly but surely stumble toward a better future

I'm not a free speech absolutist if that's what you're asking, though in more general terms I support it

u think jordan peterson is one of the greatest current thinkers so clearly it isn't working as u think it should

Free speech is still being confused with saying whatever you without accountability?

It’s free speech because you aren’t being arrested by the government for whatever dumb s*** you say, doesn’t mean others have to tolerate your stupidity. If you support free speech you’re supporting for these idiots to say what they want and the government not censoring them.

Anything else you can stfu about because other people can ban and shut off whoever they want on the platforms they built.

What? Lol

nobody really is a free speech absolutist tbh

Jordan Peterson has helped countless young men find their direction and a sense of meaning in their lives, he’s played a huge role in getting people thinking and talking about the current issues plaguing the western world.

But what’s that’s got to do with any of this?

yeah but some people like to larp as though they are

Why would you think this?

most ppl who call themselves "free speech absolutists" just mean that the government should never directly punish people for saying things and that's a very narrow view of what free speech entails

Pre internet I would've been all for it

Not so sure now, when one Twitter post can gain worldwide traction

I don't think there's much value to free speech absolutism. If anything it just gives people complacency. It's the representation of ideology. You can pay lip service to whatever. It doesn't change the power dynamic.

In principle, sure, I'm glad I can say whatever I want without fear of repercussion. In practice, it's just a license to scream into a void completely oblivious to the actual doctrine you're being subjected to. Not to mention that speech has an economic dimension where the commoner's volume is dwarfed by any moneyed interest.

The restrictive quality is far more important. Racism is an obvious threshold. Sexism, homophobia, etc. Freedom of speech is often just a Trojan Horse of sorts for promoting toxic ideas. I personally world have different thresholds than somebody else. That's the negotiation. Those in power often do not negotiate however. They exert power. That's why they have it.

What complete rubbish

Free speech is a pillar of a free society

Allowing people to spout whatever nonsense they want is the price we pay for freedom, and it’s a small price to pay given the alternative

You’d rather live in a society where what your allowed to say is dictated to you? Do you realise the ramifications of that? Do you realise how quickly such a thing fails?

Racists and sexists should be allowed to say whatever they want

Everybody else gets to point at them and laugh at them

That’s a beautiful system

That's not how it goes tho lol

100%. however, i don't think "free speech" should extend to social media because the only way to enforce it would be government regulation, which honestly opens up way worse possibilities than simply banning users who express hateful opinions. in a sense i actually support tech censorship because it encourages people to branch out to different websites, which helps keep things competitive and avoids what seems like an inevitable future of the same three or four websites dominating the entire internet.

I think my post is a bit more nuanced than you give it credit for. Freedom is also a really loaded word used to spearhead many terrible causes. You can contextualize so many awful policies as a freedom from this or that. The right to this or that. These are general concepts when the real question is what type of agenda do they conceal?

I guess it boils down to the fact that to enforce censorship laws, somebody has to be entrusted with the power to dictate what will and won't be censored, and that in itself ruins things.

It would be nice in theory if you could outlaw certain things that nobody agrees with, but it opens the door for whoever's in power to control information. And nobody deserves that power or can be trusted with that power, no matter how righteous they might seem.

Free speech allows people to freely exchange and discuss ideas, allows people to rule out the bad ones and pursue the good ones. Any form of restricting this just restricts a society's ability to advance imo.

People are censored without censorship laws constantly. That's how institutions function. They're ideological enclaves. Again, refer to my example of the economic dimension of expression. The mechanisms of speech are not equal in scope nor are they equally accessible.

I can't envision any enviable/sustainable organized society in which there isn't a power structure. Debating the power limiting features of that structure is important. However, I think any responsible society interested in maintaining its composition does exercise power.

I don't think allowing hate speech is important to the advancement of society. Very much the opposite in fact. Where as you see free speech as a void to be filled, I see it as a carefully calculated playing field. One in which those who gain ground have no interest in extending the same courtesy afterward. Whether that entails legislation or not is besides the point. The philosophy of the ruling class remains the same. That's how they rule.

no b****

Ban.

free speech don’t exist