|
|
|
|
|
by binibus
1518 days ago
|
|
I like to think of it as the right to freedom of speech and the "spirit" of free speech. The definition of the first is simple. You have the right of not been coerced to (not) say what you do (not) want to say. Note that this includes the possibility of being coerced not only by the government but by any other institution/individual. It also grants the right of private entities to arbitrarily decide their platform rules. The spirit of free speech is more vaporous, but it's the idea that powers the right. It's the notion that every perspective deserves to be listened and that the society will be better as a consequence. It's one of the main values of western culture. One can defend the right but not the spirit, the spirit but not the right, both or none of them. |
|