How Democracy Dies

[grumbler]

Okay, so I looked up the info about that Netflix firing. According to the media I read (at least CNN and WSJ), he used the n-word on multiple occasions despite being told it was inappropriate. Nowhere does it say that his words were taken out of context. Sounds like he has only himself to blame here.

He used it once in a meeting to show how shocked people could be over the use of the word "retarded."  He used it again when describing to HR what happened the first time.  He does have only himself to blame.  He's in communications, so he has to know how quickly the lynch mob can form.  In neither case was he actually using it as a slur, but that doesn't excuse his failure to understand how the mob mentality works.  Can you imagine Mark Twain lasting five seconds in today's world?

About freedom of speech. It means that you can say whatever crap you like, sure. If you then get called out on it, get told to fuck off and shut up, etc., is simply other people exercising their freedom of speech. And of course, if your speech is actually harmful, like promoting racism or genocide, then you certainly should suffer more severe consequences. With freedom comes responsibility and there needs to be some way to protect those who could be harmed. That's true in many spheres of life, otherwise we'd be living in some fucked-up libertarian dystopia.

In the case of the Netflix exec, there wasn't the issue of actual harm.  No one was referred to by the use of the term.  It was a matter of speech codes.  You'd think that an executive would understand that his skin color determines what he can and cannot say, not whether anyone was harmed.

[grumbler]

You have just undermined about 200 years of thought regarding freedom of expression and the limits that freedom has.

Maybe, but the 200 years in question were 1300-1500.

[grumbler]

Most civilized nations have laws about hate speech, as it happens. They seem to work fine.

Not really, as the silencing of dissenting voices through fear and intimidation, by actors on both sides of the political spectrum, have shown.  Hate speech laws only operate against hate speech.  Non-hate-speech, like arguing that male white students should not be directed to stay away from a college campus so that non-white-male students can enjoy a "day of absence," results in mob action shutting down the school and threats against the speaker.  Though, I suppose, one could argue that the fact that that particular college saw enrollment collapse means that the marketplace of ideas has some role to play.

Hate speech isn't the question.  It is illegal and, in mainstream communities, not tolerated.  The question is stifling free speech when it isn't hate speech.

[Berkut]

In the relation to your last paragraph "We" don't decide the consequences.  That is the whole point of the strong protections in law against the state interfering with expressive rights.  Private actors can and do decide how they will react.  That is part of how the marketplace of ideas works.

I mean bullying and fear are a great way to control the marketplace of ideas and make sure only proper ideas are expressed but I would not really call that a marketplace.

Fear of making a stupid comment - yep is exactly how part of it works.  Not sure what you are characterizing as "bullying" but be sure that if anyone here starts spouting white supremist views here on Languish, they are likely to feel bullied when we reply.

That isn't the problem - the problem is if someone doesn't like something you say, so they call your boss and tell them that unless they fire you, they are going to lose your business.

Multiplied by a bunch.

[The Brain]

Yup. Berkut, there is no such thing as civil society. Shut up about it already.

If one wishes to impose one's view of a civil society that can certainly be achieved.  But it is at the cost of freedom of expression.  It is the great irony of those who rely on freedom of expression arguments to argue that expressive rights of others ought to be restricted.

I don't think you understand the discussion.

Yeah, that's a really productive thing to say.  While you're at it, why don't you tell a man in a wheelchair that he's not walking?

I don't think explaining to him how to walk would be helpful, but YMMV.

[frunk]

How one tweet can ruin your life

[Zoupa]

Berkut, your beef should be with the employers who fire those people.

Why don't you bitch about them instead of the woke crowd as you call them?

Isn't the woke crowd exercising their freedom of speech?

[DGuller]

Berkut, your beef should be with the employers who fire those people.

Why don't you bitch about them instead of the woke crowd as you call them?

Isn't the woke crowd exercising their freedom of speech?

I do think that people who are cowardly in the face of lynch mob should be held much more accountable than they are, but most employers are ultimately answerable to faceless shareholders who just care about the bottom line.  Even if some manager decides to take a principled stand, sooner or later someone in the reporting chain is going to say that no one is worth the hassle. 

I would say that people behaving immorally and forming lynch mobs are more responsible for what results than innocent bystanders who are drawn into someone else's fight and don't sacrifice themselves.

[The Brain]

Berkut, your beef should be with the employers who fire those people.

Why don't you bitch about them instead of the woke crowd as you call them?

Isn't the woke crowd exercising their freedom of speech?

I was thinking of something nice to say and I think your tribal loyalty is impressive.

[grumbler]

Isn't the woke crowd exercising their freedom of speech?

Not when the woke crowd is engaging in hate speech.  Why won't you denounce hate speech when it is uttered by the "woke crowd?"

[Razgovory]

I'm unclear on something.  Are we proposing to protect freedom of speech by removing the ability to criticize and the right to free association?

[Zoupa]

Isn't the woke crowd exercising their freedom of speech?

Not when the woke crowd is engaging in hate speech.  Why won't you denounce hate speech when it is uttered by the "woke crowd?"

I'm not even sure what we're talking about here anymore.

Is the twitter mob (which apparently is only comprised of lefties) engaging in hate speech? Do we have any examples of this?

I'm not on twitter. Never saw the point. All these talks of mobs and crowds, do we have any metrics? Do these guys actually represent a sizable portion of the population?

[Zoupa]

Berkut, your beef should be with the employers who fire those people.

Why don't you bitch about them instead of the woke crowd as you call them?

Isn't the woke crowd exercising their freedom of speech?

I was thinking of something nice to say and I think your tribal loyalty is impressive.

K

[Valmy]

I'm unclear on something.  Are we proposing to protect freedom of speech by removing the ability to criticize and the right to free association?

We are proposing nothing of the sort. At least I am not.

What sorts of ways of removing the ability to critisize and the right to free association have been proposed?

[Valmy]

(which apparently is only comprised of lefties)

Whataboutism. Nice.