[altacc]

> People are losing their jobs for defending their property.

I'm interested in which cases you're referring to here.

I'll add a caveat that small numbers of outlying events which might have been excessive or wrong do not invalidate the notion that society shouldn't hold people accountable for their actions or be judged on their opinions. That's an existing concept, what's happening is a reframing of what's acceptable, which is something that has happened many times in the past and will continue to do so in the future.

[bE9a3S5So8igd3]

> do not invalidate the notion that society shouldn't hold people accountable for their actions or be judged on their opinions

You're conflating passive judgement with active harassment, witch hunts, for "having the wrong opinion." In fact you don't even have to voice an opinion to be the subject of modern leftist witch hunts. Today, being white and smirking is enough to provoke the mania that has consumed the western world. If you're caught in the wrong place, at the wrong time, and covered by leftist media. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/January_2019_Lincoln_Memorial_...

[altacc]

I do agree that some of the responses to people's actions become harassment, but this happens across the board. In much of the right wing media you can't criticise anything in America without being labelled un-American, a traitor, socialist, antifa or whatever the current label is they're using to bypass the cognitive functions of their audience.

The question is, given that perfection is impossible, what amount of injustice, such as harassment, is acceptable for a greater good. This question constantly manifests in the economic, legal and social systems we live in. Just like the legal system, there will be some injustices that can't be avoided any everyone has their personal perspective on how much and to whom is acceptable.

It's interesting that the example you link to is largely about freedom of the press as that's exactly what the first amendment protects. In that case there is clear action and consequence on both sides. People are free to say want they think and there were consequences.

Your point above was that people lose their jobs because they say something that the left-wing disagrees with and that harassment leads to job loss. The example you provided fails to back that up directly but does provide an example of someone on the left losing their job for something they said. There was also backlash against several other people who had commented on the students' behaviour. There were death threats to people on both sides. It was a f-ing mess all round.

In summary, you're complaining about the left doing something without realizing or acknowledging that this isn't restricted to just those on the left or right, everyone is doing this. But if you're one one side you'll ignore attacks by your own side, labeling them legitimate defense, and over-criticise the other side's same actions as unjustifable attacks. Everyone would be better off if we could all acknowledging our bias more.

I think it was Jefferson who thought that freedom of the press was essential even though press would become partisan and present opinions not news. He idealistically and, in hindsight, naively thought that people would be able to use reason & understanding to draw the true picture. But that's not what happens: people are baited, told what to think and react impulsively. Again, that's not just the left or the right, it's people. The problem is always people. To paraphrase Trump: there are awful people on both sides.