People usually defend free speech by making the legal or moral case for it, but I want to make the utilitarian case for free speech (and "the marketplace of ideas" more broadly)—and describe how these concepts have helped enable the moral progress we celebrate today.
Thread 👇
Thread 👇
People want to limit free speech in the name of “holding ppl accountable” for unacceptable speech.
They don’t want hurtful views to perpetuate, especially if they've caused harm in the past.
This may be well intentioned, but I worry it misunderstands how moral progress happens.
They don’t want hurtful views to perpetuate, especially if they've caused harm in the past.
This may be well intentioned, but I worry it misunderstands how moral progress happens.
If you think about the moral progress we made in the last 100 years, there was a time when that exact progress was deemed "harmful"—when it was a view people would get "canceled" for, in the name of “holding them accountable”
Those "harmful" ideas entered the marketplace & won
Those "harmful" ideas entered the marketplace & won
If you prevent ideas from entering the marketplace, you'll miss out on moral progress
We must assume that anything in charge of “holding people accountable” is likely wrong about something (otherwise there'd be no more moral progress) & should be appropriately humble as a result
We must assume that anything in charge of “holding people accountable” is likely wrong about something (otherwise there'd be no more moral progress) & should be appropriately humble as a result
Of course, most unpopular ideas are not breakthroughs, they're dumb.
But 1 in 100 or a million make up for all the dumb ideas.
The idea for example, that monarchy is not the proper form of government was deeply offensive at the time. So was evolution, the world is round, etc
But 1 in 100 or a million make up for all the dumb ideas.
The idea for example, that monarchy is not the proper form of government was deeply offensive at the time. So was evolution, the world is round, etc
An open conversation allows millions of minds to go to work on these offensive ideas & find the few gold nuggets, the needles in the haystack and throw the rest away.
But even for the dumb ideas—the best way to eliminate them is to bring them to light so they can be fought.
But even for the dumb ideas—the best way to eliminate them is to bring them to light so they can be fought.
B/c suppression doesn’t change minds
You may suppress for a while, but you won’t change minds (they may double down actually), & once they have power, they may silence you.
You should only create a system that you’d be OK w/ in the hands of your enemy, because 1 day it will be.
You may suppress for a while, but you won’t change minds (they may double down actually), & once they have power, they may silence you.
You should only create a system that you’d be OK w/ in the hands of your enemy, because 1 day it will be.
When you curtail free speech, what happens is that you weaken the quest for knowledge and moral improvement, and knowledge and moral improvement is ultimately the solution to eliminating hate
Hate comes out of fear and out of ignorance. And you fight that with knowledge.
Hate comes out of fear and out of ignorance. And you fight that with knowledge.
There is a long history behind censoring & punishing ppl for what they say & it's not good: Think China, Russia, Germany at their worst moments
Instead of saying that curtailing free speech doesn't cause much harm, make the case for how censorship has led to
more moral progress
Instead of saying that curtailing free speech doesn't cause much harm, make the case for how censorship has led to
more moral progress
Free speech doesn't mean "freedom of consequences"
But we should not let their "consequences" also prevent moral progress
If we want moral progress, we must respond to arguments w/ counter arguments, not bullets (economic), b/c those same bullets can be used at us & our speech
But we should not let their "consequences" also prevent moral progress
If we want moral progress, we must respond to arguments w/ counter arguments, not bullets (economic), b/c those same bullets can be used at us & our speech
Let's give one example of the marketplace of ideas in action: Gay rights
Remember, most people in America once believed homosexuality was a mental illness, & that pro-gay speech was bigoted. They wanted to prevent these ideas from entering the marketplace."Hold them accountable"
Remember, most people in America once believed homosexuality was a mental illness, & that pro-gay speech was bigoted. They wanted to prevent these ideas from entering the marketplace."Hold them accountable"
Jonathan Rauch believes the US has done a better job w/ gay rights than Europe because in the US we could
identify the hate, confront the fears underlying it, and contrasting the truth against it&discredit hate in ppl minds—That's what we did.
“Sunlight is the best disinfectant”
identify the hate, confront the fears underlying it, and contrasting the truth against it&discredit hate in ppl minds—That's what we did.
“Sunlight is the best disinfectant”
Consider this story to illustrate the point:
In 1957 a man named Frank Kameny is fired from his government job as an astronomer, and he's fired because he's gay. No other reason, but because he's gay.
So remember gay people in this time were treated very poorly:
In 1957 a man named Frank Kameny is fired from his government job as an astronomer, and he's fired because he's gay. No other reason, but because he's gay.
So remember gay people in this time were treated very poorly:
They were arrested in their own homes for making love to each other (& got criminal records), they'd get openly beaten on the streets, and if they called the police, the police would often join in the fun, arrest the gay person instead of the person who committed the crime.
Back to Frank Kameny. He never served as an astronomer again. That was expected
But what was unexpected was that he did not back down.
He believed that the Declaration of Independence was a personal promise that the founders had made to him and he decided to ensure his promise
But what was unexpected was that he did not back down.
He believed that the Declaration of Independence was a personal promise that the founders had made to him and he decided to ensure his promise
So he began an opposition movement. He appealed his firing to the US government. He failed. He appealed it to the Supreme Court. He failed. He appealed to Congress. He failed & received letters saying “of all the letters I've ever received, yours is the most disgusting”
Frank says, I went to Europe to fight tyranny overseas, only to come home and discover that I must now fight the tyranny in the US.
So he then begins representing other gay people who've been fired from their jobs because he's determined. He will win in the marketplace of ideas.
So he then begins representing other gay people who've been fired from their jobs because he's determined. He will win in the marketplace of ideas.
In 1965 Frank and some other people led the first peaceful, openly gay protest with a protest march in front of Independence Hall in Philadelphia.
in 1970, Frank's the first openly gay person to run for Congress. He loses, but he keeps pushing for the cause. He knows he's right.
in 1970, Frank's the first openly gay person to run for Congress. He loses, but he keeps pushing for the cause. He knows he's right.
He challenges the psychiatric diagnosis of homosexuality as a disease. He does all this stuff for years, and no one ever listens
Until they do start listening! In the 70s, people begin to notice what he & other gay activists are saying
His ideas start winning in the marketplace
Until they do start listening! In the 70s, people begin to notice what he & other gay activists are saying
His ideas start winning in the marketplace
As society held its prejudice to critical scrutiny, over enough time the prejudice lost its appeal. It just didn't make sense. As soon as it did, the dominoes of hate started to fall, and within a generation people can't believe we ever had a problem w/ gay marriage.
So Frank Kameny died in 2011 at age 86.
He lived long enough not only to see same sex marriage be legal in multiple states, and to see sodomy laws overturn, and to see gay people serving in US government in secure positions and to see gay people serve in the military—
In 2009—
He lived long enough not only to see same sex marriage be legal in multiple states, and to see sodomy laws overturn, and to see gay people serving in US government in secure positions and to see gay people serve in the military—
In 2009—
He lived long enough to receive a formal apology from the US gov't from the very agency that fired him
He received their Roosevelt prize for public service—their highest prize
And best of all, the director of the agency that had fired him that was now apologizing was openly gay
He received their Roosevelt prize for public service—their highest prize
And best of all, the director of the agency that had fired him that was now apologizing was openly gay
So this is the power of free speech and the marketplace of ideas.
Frank didn't have money. He didn't have anything but the power of his ideas & a marketplace to compete in.
And that is the thing we must protect if we want to sustainably change minds and enable moral progress.
Frank didn't have money. He didn't have anything but the power of his ideas & a marketplace to compete in.
And that is the thing we must protect if we want to sustainably change minds and enable moral progress.
/FIN
For those who want to go deeper, I recommend reading: @jon_rauch's book "Kindly Inquisitors". Much of the above is inspired by & summarizing his work: amazon.com/Kindly-Inquisi…
@Ayishat_Akanbi is also inspiring on the topic:
For those who want to go deeper, I recommend reading: @jon_rauch's book "Kindly Inquisitors". Much of the above is inspired by & summarizing his work: amazon.com/Kindly-Inquisi…
@Ayishat_Akanbi is also inspiring on the topic:
