[AlexMax]

> Trashing a person's reputation and character through a targeted internet campaign (hello Twitter mobs) is another matter.

Isn't that also free speech? Or should free speech only apply to the first hypothetical individual stumping for "race realists"?

[SuoDuanDao]

I think it is free speech. But I think it is also uncouth behaviour and will be looked back on with embarrassment by most who participated in it in a few years time.

I think the solution is a better mechanism to tune out people who are obviously (to us) insane or morally bankrupt. Unfortunately, I see no easy way to do that without strengthening our filter bubbles even more. Maybe widespread meditation practice would help the race realists and the bigoteers be more visible without having as much impact.

[throwaway894345]

> will be looked back on with embarrassment by most who participated in it in a few years time

I hope you're right but I don't share your optimism. The "silent majority" has failed to stand up against this behavior so far; I'm not confident they'll draw the line in the near future.

[dependenttypes]

It is speech. I believe that they should be free to express it only if

- they allow their target to reply to it (and have it displayed alongside with their post) -- this is the most important

- they are being honest in their arguments (not intentionally constructing straw-men for example or repeating over and over the same thing that was answered before)

[throwaway894345]

Defamation, threats of violence, harassment, etc are not free speech, but they are central to Twitter mobs. I would also contend that a concerted petition for an employer to remove their employee constitutes a credible threat since employers often do terminate employees for being targeted by mobs. It really should be only a theoretical question; however, because we ought to have legal protection for employment that would declaw these mobs (especially since the mobs themselves are prejudiced on the basis of race, sex, religion, gender identity, etc--enabling them to have power over an individual's employment constitutes de facto employment discrimination).

EDIT: Downvoters, what do you object to? Do you really think defamation and threats are not free speech? Or do you not think these are cornerstones of Twitter mobs?

[dilandau]

Overwhelmingly it is the identity-politics/SJW crowd that seems to be going after individuals, targeting the vulnerable, and attempting to ruin actual lives.

[UncleMeat]

Yep. Anita Sarkeesian never had mountains of death threats sent her way. Nope never.

An acquaintance of mine was called out on fox news for "teaching the most anti-american class in america" (it was a class on police brutality). Death threats for months.