Free Speech: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 160: | Line 160: | ||
== Related Pages == | == Related Pages == | ||
* [[Intellectual Dark Web]] | * [[Intellectual Dark Web]] | ||
* [[Totalizing Ideologies]] | |||
{{stub}} | {{stub}} | ||
Revision as of 06:19, 30 July 2025
'Free markets', 'tolerance', 'pacifism', 'free speech' etc.. are what physicists call 'effective theories' and require warning labels.
Obscenity charges against Gonzo pioneer John Stagliano are dropped! Miller v California remains a menace to free speech http://bit.ly/aVTowv
The "Free speech zone" = X was invented & named in the USA = Y in 1988. Q: Name its even more important set-theoretic complement Y \ X.
Confused by people promoting free speech by being deliberately offensive when you can offend many more people by simply thinking clearly.
If you don't define free speech movement goals carefully, you end up complaining about the free speech of others that inhibits yours.
I'm not as focused on free speech as I am around the "Don't worry, contrarian intellectuals. You'll still have a job on Monday."-movement.
While often tempted, I'm not a free speech absolutist. I'm an anti-utopian w a commitment to keep our world safe from well meaning utopians.
Most of my friends who are free speech absolutists have never run the simulator forward to see the dystopia total free speech would create.
I like free speech but not absolute free speech. The US is the finer but not the latter.
Free speech isnât a fascinating topic.
At least to me, itâs more like âair hungerâ: when youâre being choked, itâs always super important to you above everything else, even if simple breathing isnât really something upon which you ever expected to focus your intellectual energy.
Related Pages
This article is a stub. You can help us by editing this page and expanding it.