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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.