social justice league chats
The Free Speech Straw Man | Dissent Magazine
The Free Speech Straw Man | Dissent Magazine
Marcia Chatelain ▪ April 25, 2016 This article is part of a forum on "Free Speech on Campus." To read contributions by David A. Bell, Jim Sleeper, and Anne-Laure White, click here. This year, the Right revived a favorite straw man; his name is Free Speech.
dissentmagazine.org




At first, I liked this article—it is competently written and well‐intentioned. But now… I’m questioning its utility.
Almost every time a rightist is criticized or booted, he accuses his opponents of ‘hating free speech.’ To them, being kicked out of spaces that don’t welcome them is tantamount to censorship. They would like to force their opinions on the uninterested. Then a progressive has to assure everybody that she’s not against free speech, kind of like how feminists have to assure boys, over & over again, that they don’t hate all men. At this point, I’m feeling sufficiently experimental to ask, ‘So what?’
Monotheists all agree that there is (or probably is) a deity, but most of them can’t agree on its nature. The deity could be many things, such as a man, a forgiver, omnipotent, omniscient, or neuter, unforgiving, limited, and so on. This applies similarly to freedom of speech: everybody supports it, but nobody can agree on it. Rather than arguing over the details, I’d prefer to take the atheist position.
We need to quit viewing freedom of speech as sacred. Its sacred status is exactly what makes it an effective shield for rightists. Peace is far more important than some Anglopuke’s right to regurgitate the same conservative viewpoints wherever and whenever he pleases without any consequences whatsoever.
This seems like what the kids on twitter call a "hot take". If you don't see how the value of freedom of expression can protect actual marginalized people, I'm not sure what to say. I'm also not going to let a bunch of right wing fucks poison the well on something actually important.
It’s absurd to claim that opponents of free speech must support every regulation on speech. There is no obligation to do so.