Read on Twitter
Today this letter from @Harpers came out with a fairly innocuous message on defending the free exchange of ideas. I signed it because anything that encourages discussion over diatribe, and debate over violence is something I wholeheartedly subscribe to. https://harpers.org/a-letter-on-justice-and-open-debate/
Unsurprisingly the attacks have come fast and furious on the message, the messengers, and the medium. I want to address some of these because they're all part of this desire of the #blobmob to silence and drown out real conversation. It is a detriment to a world on the brink
The first attack is: Everyone is over 40.
That's not true. From myself to @Olivianuzzi to @jessesingal and countless others, that's not true. Not that it matters.
That's not true. From myself to @Olivianuzzi to @jessesingal and countless others, that's not true. Not that it matters.
The second attack is: This is just the establishment already large audiences disappointed no one is listening to them. The blue checks.
I'm not a blue check. I don't have a large audience. And I've been living most of my adult life in places of legal censorship.
I'm not a blue check. I don't have a large audience. And I've been living most of my adult life in places of legal censorship.
The third attack is: There's a bunch of nobodys on the list.
Um. Nobodys. Elites. People already with audiences. People without audiences. The critiques are already contradictory.
Um. Nobodys. Elites. People already with audiences. People without audiences. The critiques are already contradictory.
The fourth attack is: People on the list are pro-Israel (probably because @bariweiss is on it).
There's a number of people of Arab origin on it (like @shadihamid) and Noam Chomsky who likely isn't the most pro- #Israel voice out there.
Also who cares?
There's a number of people of Arab origin on it (like @shadihamid) and Noam Chomsky who likely isn't the most pro- #Israel voice out there.
Also who cares?
The fifth attack is: 'Read the room' this is a moment about confronting white supremacy not defending free speech.
This attacks falls flat on its face and is the reason that there is this coalescence around #WhiteFragility nonsense. The right answers require rigorous debate.
This attacks falls flat on its face and is the reason that there is this coalescence around #WhiteFragility nonsense. The right answers require rigorous debate.
The sixth attack is: Why an 'Open Letter'? It's kind of pathetic.
Twitter is a medium for destructive discussion and inhibits a clear exchange of ideas. Maybe the Open Letter is 'pathetic'. But you read it, didn't you? So it was effective.
Twitter is a medium for destructive discussion and inhibits a clear exchange of ideas. Maybe the Open Letter is 'pathetic'. But you read it, didn't you? So it was effective.
The seventh attack (from @AnandWrites) is: What about structural limitations on free speech?
Yes, this is a great point BUT it is a simultaneous discussion. How much speech is currently limited to the platforms controlled by very few people?
Yes, this is a great point BUT it is a simultaneous discussion. How much speech is currently limited to the platforms controlled by very few people?
The eight attack is from the right (and people like @RubinReport):
This is just a liberal fest that excludes #Trump voices. I would say the spirit of the letter is to encourage all voices into a discussion. Let's debate.
This is just a liberal fest that excludes #Trump voices. I would say the spirit of the letter is to encourage all voices into a discussion. Let's debate.
Finally, the last attack is: How can you sign a letter with people like @jk_rowling (who apparently is now evil incarnate)?
I hate everything @davidfrum stands for. But I have no problem saying I have no problem debating and defeating all his pernicious ideas.
That's all.
I hate everything @davidfrum stands for. But I have no problem saying I have no problem debating and defeating all his pernicious ideas.
That's all.
