Read on Twitter
nothing of this has anything to do with "free speech." You're a lawyer, so you know that the First Amendment applies only to the government. No one has a 1st Am right to write a NYT op-ed, or to not be criticized, or fired by their private sector job saying/doing dumb shit. https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1280894160451579905
our government stifles free speech all the time, and it's almost always to suppress left-wing views. See here: https://nomoredeaths.org/en/author/campaign/ and here: https://theintercept.com/2020/01/29/chevron-ecuador-lawsuit-steven-donziger/ and here: https://psmag.com/social-justice/j20-defendants-and-the-crackdown-on-protest But rightwingers are all complaining about private blowback. Not the govt.
"free speech" has no discernible meaning beyond the 1st Am. Does ur teenager have the "free speech" to tell you to eat shit, without consequences? Besides, most of the signatories dont hold any principles. They gladly try to get ppl fired for their speech https://twitter.com/omarabdoun/status/1280930227464687622?s=20
maybe we should get rid of at-will employment. But that's an employment issue, not a "free speech" issue. Or maybe we should regulate or nationalize large social media companies. But that's an antitrust issue, not a free speech issue.
No one has a "right" not to face consequences for their speech, unless the consequences are being imposed by the government. If you think "free speech" extends beyond that, you've lost the plot.
lol this is true i guess, but it has *absolutely nothing* to do with anything in the letter.
some absurd ideas are elevated merely by treating them seriously enough to "debate." Should we "debate" whether to send in armed troops to put down BLM protests? https://twitter.com/omarabdoun/status/1280937376567697408?s=20
the left has been excluded from all levels of power. If we finally have some power in the cultural realm, we should absolutely use it. "Free speech" has nothing to do with this.
