Those who exercise free speech should also defend it even when it’s offensive

Re:Those who exercise free speech should also defend it even... by syshum on Thursday June 25, 2020 @11:23AM (#23641760)

>>People firing people for expressing those views are often openly stating the belief those views are 'incorrect' and that enforcement action must be taken against those with incorrect views.

No that is absolutely not the case, companies today are responding to the Mob not their own self determination on the issue.

Which is what I and others have a problem with, not the a company on their own, of their own free will choose to fire someone but because the mob demanded it or their head

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Those who exercise free speech should also defend it even... by notahacker on Thursday June 25, 2020 @01:19PM (#23643006)

I have to admit I'm even further from understanding your position now: companies should have the right to enforce absolute conformity on their employees and fire them for whatever arbitrary reason they want to, but consumers absolutely shouldn't have the right to boycott in the event they find extremely objectionable?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Those who exercise free speech should also defend it even... by joshuamorton on Thursday June 25, 2020 @02:24PM (#23643817)

No no, they should have the right to, we as a society should just discourage people from exercising their agency in that regard.

That way no one needs to make laws to enforce conformity. It's just enforced by social norms. It's the speech version of Jordan Peterson's "enforced monogomy" concept.

Granted even in this sardonic explanation, I'm not sure how deep the rabbit hole is supposed to go. Using your agency to protest <a bad act> is discouraged so we should use our agency to discourage the discouragement. But then we're just deciding that discouraging <a bad act> is itself a bad act. And so the whole thing is self-contradictory.

[ Parent | on HN ]