Thread by @KurtSchlichter

You’re right - you’re not smart.
If this was a good faith argument instead of you tweeting nonsense, I could point out my long and public record of free speech absolutism, including opposition to flag burning laws.
But it’s not.
Let me explain to those confused by you. 1/

https://twitter.com/hasanthehun/status/1275074934994202624

You support the principle of punishing dissenting expression.
You just don’t think this should apply to you when you dissent.
You are more than happy to apply it to others who dissent from your orthodoxy.
In fact, you think punishing such speech is good. 2/

You support the principle of punishing dissenting expression.
You just don’t think the punishment should be jail, at least not for flag burning.
You are perfectly happy to punish dissenting speech by destroying the speaker economically. 3/

In other words, you prefer that corporations punish dissenting speech, which works out nicely for you since the dissenters can’t change corporations by voting, and there is no troublesome due process as there would be in a government prosecution. 4/

In the end, you want to have a unilateral unaccountable and unappealable power to punish dissenting views.
My point is that this is untenable; why would the dissenters allow you this informal power but forgo their own (political) power?
They won’t.
You uncorked this bottle. 5/