[jordigh]

> Free speech advocates have gathered on one side, advocates for social justice on the other

wtf

Those two are supposed to be the same side. There's some really perverse twisting of words here to put social justice in opposition to free speech. How has the debate come to this?

[Kalium]

A speaker-blind selection process selected a talk by someone who is considered by some to be offensive for reasons not directly relevant to the content of the talk.

[st3v3r]

Yet definitely relevant to the people who would choose to attend the conference. It's definitely going to make some people feel uncomfortable attending, knowing that they invited someone who believes that you are not deserving of human rights and dignity to speak.

[calibraxis]

The Lambdaconf guy who mindbogglingly rejects social media for being "fickle, highly emotional, and irrational" has no idea about free speech.

Moldbug has a record of going to professional confs and advocating racism. (Working to exclude people.) Furthermore, one of their sponsors is a racist political blog, which is unprecedented in my experience. (For evidence, see my comment history.)

Context: a country which notoriously kills and incarcerates blacks, as a replacement for slavery. Racism involves political actions which directly impact the lives of participants and users.

This creates an atmosphere completely counter to education. People always say "Hallway chats are the best part!" so it's not just about a talk.

[flubert]

>Those two are supposed to be the same side.

How is it different from how "Progressive" and "Classically Liberal/Libertarian" are pretty much opposites?

[jordigh]

I just think that one or both sides is being misrepresented or is being dishonest. If you don't want free speech, do you want censorship? If you don't want social justice, do you want social injustice? It's not like you must have one of censorship or social injustice. There's a false dichotomy going on here.

[SolarNet]

But there isn't, a blind selection process ended up selecting somebody that social justice deems as worthy of censorship. Hence free speech (blind selection of ideas on their merits - regardless of who it is) vs. social justice (ostracization of bigots by removing all platforms for their speech). The policies - of variations of these two ideological positions - are diametrically opposed in this case.

[thescribe]

I have not seen or experienced everything, but from my perspective, social justice seems to be the philosophical opposite to natural rights.