You know what’s really underrated?
Social opprobrium.
🧵
Like, these Young Republicans in their Telegram chat spouting just the must vile stuff imaginable? They should feel ashamed and embarrassed. The people around them should •make• them feel ashamed and embarrassed about it.
They’re not putting forward some thoughtful but controversial theory of whatever. They’re not saying things that Deserve Respect Even If We Disagree. This isn’t that kind of communication. They’re fantasizing about enslavement and gas chambers. There’s nothing for society to gain here from an Honest and Open Exchange of Views Followed by Thoughtful Reflection.
There is, however, a lot for society to gain from the people who want subjugation and slavery and murder knowing that they will be pariahs if they let those thoughts out of their mouth. There’s a lot to gain from everyone around them seeing them greeted with revulsion and shunned.
That, too, is part of free speech. It is the •foundation• of free speech.
The First Amendment in the US says — wisely — that we should avoid giving the government the power to determine with the force of law what beliefs are unacceptable. That is •not• because all beliefs are acceptable, however; it is because giving the government such power opens the floodgates of authoritarianism.
Here’s the thing: some beliefs •are• unacceptable. We deny the government the power to determine which ones with the understanding that we •must• do that job ourselves, through social negotiation.
@inthehands IMO The US's particular culture around this goes further than the first amendment: freedom comes before other values, which is both a decisive advantage and a crucial weakness. I would argue that something like tall poppy syndrome has a socially protective aspect for example, and that is almost completely absent in the US.
