ThoughtStorms Wiki

Some of my more recent thinking on this is at :


Good pushback : ThirteenWaysOfLookingAtDisinformation


DaveWiner on the unedited voice of a person :

Quora Answer : In relation to the CharlieHebdo attack, does freedom of speech necessarily protect provocative, non-constructive content?

Jan 14, 2015

People are confused about freedom of speech. Freedom of speech is just one thing. The position that we can't trust the government to make laws restricting speech. Because if the government could make laws restricting speech, they'd abuse that power to keep the electorate in the dark. And if the government can keep the electorate ignorant, then democracy can't work properly.

Beyond that .... nothing.

To believe in freedom of speech doesn't imply that you think that all speech is valid. Or to be celebrated. Or that you don't think that there are things that oughtn't to be said or drawn. Or that you believe people have the right to be published or to be read.

It just means you don't think that the government should be allowed to prevent people from saying things.

So, what's your question? Are some people are provocative? Yes, you're right. Some people are provocative.

Are some people are disrespectful? Yes. That too.


And you are free to explain that to them. To complain to them. To try to convince them to stop. And to try to educate them to not be so hurtful.

The only thing you shouldn't do is try to get the government to put a stop to it. Because that's giving the government too much power. Freedom of speech is not about defining the limits of what's respectful, or "acceptable". It's about defining the limits of who the government is allowed to put in prison.