Almost everyone in your timeline supports very robust free speech protections. The debate about free speech feels so contentious because it often feels like "free speech advocates" are advocating more for some types of speech than other types of speech.
The Harpers letter thing is awkward because many of the signatories are actually pretty good. But then there's, for example, J.K. Rowling, who just seems mad she can't rant about trans people without getting criticized.
There's a small but influential group of very vocal assholes who are ruining free speech advocacy by making it feel exclusionary. And that seems like a problem for real free speech advocacy.
I would be substantially more interested in -- and possibly persuaded by -- an open letter about free speech that explicitly did *not* seek the signatures of the usual crowd of Steven Pinker, Bari Weiss, etc.
The thing about the Professional Free Speech Advocates is that they're so boring!
But Saladin Ambar, Jeet Heer, Samuel Moyn, and Nell Irvin Painter? Sure, that would be a more interesting set of advocates and I'd be more inclined to hear what they have to say.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
