yeah it’s a philosophical question the answer to which changes with the times (like, does free speech/expression even mean the same thing in the 1700s as in the present era where “speech” is delivered and amplified by machines without even the necessity of direct human involvement).
Comment on YSK: That nazis Don't Actually Believe in Free Speech
nednobbins@lemm.ee 1 month ago
Does anyone?
The closest I can think of to “real free speech absolutists” is the old-school doctrinal libertarians. Even they have limits on what they believe should be allowed and specifically state that contracts should be legally enforceable.
notsoshaihulud@lemmy.world 1 month ago
technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 month ago
The ACLU believes money is speech and corporations are people. They’re just nationalist wackos.
chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 month ago
You don’t need to be an “absolutist” to believe in free speech. Open exchange of ideas is valuable. Not needing to be suspicious of everyone hiding what they really think out of fear is valuable. Censorship powers are very tempting to abuse and the consequences of their abuse are terrible. Believing in free speech can just be understanding this stuff and having a bias against shutting people up as a go-to solution.
orcrist@lemm.ee 1 month ago
There are no absolutists, my friend. Everyone has limits.
nednobbins@lemm.ee 1 month ago
Exactly. The real debate is on which parts should be off limits.
Most people can think of some speech that they consider so horrible that nobody should be allowed to say it.
People often try to hedge that position by arguing that they’re not even really infringing on anyone’s speech because their form of restriction doesn’t meet a sufficient threshold of censorship.
lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com 1 month ago
Yes, old-school liberals, the ACLU, etc.
It’s bizarre & disappointing that newer generations seem to associate freedom of speech with right-wing authoritarians when freedom of speech has been a firmly liberal value advanced through the enlightenment & civil rights movement. Everyone ought to defend it.
ICastFist@programming.dev 1 month ago
Claim it, twist it, poison it, ruin it. Hate groups and vile scum always do that with things people used to care about or that used to be innocuous.
lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com 1 month ago
Nothing new historically. You don’t have to accept their false premises by surrendering ideas to them.
Free speech is power, not innocuous: authorities fear it. It belongs to the people unless they surrender it.
Used to care about? Only if you let them stop you.
technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 month ago
The ACLU are nationalist ideologues who don’t believe in anything. They promote the wacky idea that money is speech and corporations are people. They “free speech absolutists” for the rich.