It means you are free to say what you want but you must take personal responsibility for and accept the consequences of saying the things you say, whatever it may be.
Do not expect everyone to blindly accept the things you say just because it's "free speech".
That’s incorrect. The concept of free speech is to be able to express controversial opinions without fear of retaliation. People don’t have to “accept” it, but what you’re describing is cancel culture which is cancer.
I'm not advocating for cancel culture. I'm simply saying that like it or not there are consequences to the things one says.
If someone is uploading to nostr.build's private server, they have the unilateral right to delete content they don't agree with. It's entitled to think they must blindly accept whatever you upload.
If I come to your house and trash it, you have every right to kick me out. This is no different. Claiming cancel culture cause you kicked my destructive and disrespectful ass out of your house is just entitled child behavior.
Well, nostr.build either supports free speech or it doesn’t. It’s that simple. He apparently does so that’s that.
I was responding to you saying “free speech does not equal inconsequential speech” because it’s incorrect. It actually means exactly that, that we can express ourselves freely.
I totally agree when you say free speech means you can express yourself freely. No objections there.
My point is that exercising free speech is not inconsequential. Protests are free speech. But if the police beats you up because of it, that is a consequence of what was said. Not condoning ithe reaction but simply illustrating reality. Right or wrong, the sovereign individual has the right to respond to that as they will - and that response also comes with consequences.
I guess my point is I am advocating for personal responsibility alongside free speech. Maybe it is better to say free speech does not absolve you of responsibility over your words.
You’re advocating for self censorship essentially. If the police are attacking you, or someone is trying to get you doxed and fired for your speech, then you aren’t living in a society that tolerates free speech.
You’re right that this is the case now, but that’s not a good thing. The issue is you’re parroting that as something that’s justified.
I think the crux of our misunderstanding is that I'm not saying that it is right.
I'm saying that we must first realize the reality of the society we live in today is that there are consequences to free speech. Not saying those consequences are justified or not.
It's absolutely fucked that police can beat you for protesting. But that's the reality we live in now and it's not right. So do something about it if you want ot to change. But know that they will respond and don't be a baby when they do (not calling you a baby, just making a point). Again, this goes on both sides.
I think it depends. I do advocate for a level of self censorship but only in the right circumstances. Nothing is purely black and white. There are times when one must speak out and there are times when one should hold their tongue. If you speak out publicly you should only do so if you can accept that someone might respond. The more extreme your actions the more extreme the response will likely be. That's just reality amd everyone has to take personal responsibility over that. Actions have consequences.
The problem that I have with what you’re saying is that, for example, on the issue of transgender operations, it’s a topic that people on the left avoid at all cost and sensor at all cost if people on the right talk about it and we feel we have to be saying crazy volatile shit in order to trigger you to get you to actually engage with us. Like why is it so controversial to say boys shouldn’t castrate themselves because they are sexually confused. This is just one example and I’m not trying to really open up a conversation about why people shouldn’t or should get sex changes at this point in time I’m just giving an example.
I get where you're coming from. Correct me if I'm misunderstanding but you feel one side is shutting down conversations and any attempt to change the narrative gets painted as adversarial. This is bullshit virtue signaling. And it seems the only way to garner engagement is with ever increasing extremism.
When I say consequence, I mean it in a non judgemental way. Garnering a consequence does not mean they are in the right and you are in the wrong.
I don't have an answer how to solve this. If I did, the world would be all peace and love. But it aint. I think there is an element of two wrongs don't make a right. Increasing extremism gets engagement but at some point its a net negative on society. Similarly, a level of self control and self sensorship can help people in a sociery get along. But censorship and shutting down conversation/discourse quickly becomes net negative also since it just builds resentment and anger.
In the end, too many people are babies and can't mentally handle opposing thought or level headed discussion. This is on all sides imo.
Just rereading some of what has been written. The part I disagree with is "free of retaliation". I think free speech as a concept only gives you the right to express yourself. I don't think it gives you the right to expect to be free of retaliation carte blanche.
There should be a certain degree of personal responsibility over what was said and the expected reaction it garners. On the flip side, the person responding also has a level of responsibility over their reaction. Everyone going nuclear helps no one and solves nothing.
Also want to say, thanks for the discussion. Really appreciate your perspective and it has given me points to think about.
Well, you’re wrong. It’s not my personal responsibility that the government, or just someone that disagrees with me, wants to physically attack me or ruin my life. That’s ridiculous. People shouldn’t be face that level of attack for merely stating an opinion.
nostr:npub13cnlldwfhwxd6qf34hnwlfya2m2qrd2zfk0alxnrup6d2fasw9wqxwkzpe nostr:npub1yqmea6fpz4rn7v0wajetkxffedqttvy7mh7ltl9vkscygw9qclmqssvmx8 nostr:npub106jfh959zx5g46gg8d4r5ldn7vxk2zdz53dmcv9g3akh29mywf8qv5yn90 nostr:npub1nxy4qpqnld6kmpphjykvx2lqwvxmuxluddwjamm4nc29ds3elyzsm5avr7 nostr:npub1hg5g87620a3vhpgmna2pzevhj88lkt3lezus76p7u5y37sfcszsszktya9 You'd change your tune if someone threatened your job over something completely legal you said online.
You act like you wouldn't, but you would.
I'm not saying that any reaction is right and just. I'm saying that the reality of living in a society is that there are consequences to what you say, legal or otherwise.
Free speech does not absolve you of personal responsibility and exercising good judgment. This goes equally to the person who reacts and the way they react.
I don't claim to judge right or wrong. But it is ignorant to believe free speech shields you from consequence. Again, consequences, whether they be right or wrong.
I honestly believe that the powers up top and what I would call the shadow government want us arguing over stupid shit like abortion and gun rights so that they can slowly just take all rights away from us and tax us into oblivion
Watch the hand that isn't waving.
Polarize the people to keep us fighting and arguing amongst ourselves so we don't see the bigger evil.
After speaking with you nostr:npub1hg5g87620a3vhpgmna2pzevhj88lkt3lezus76p7u5y37sfcszsszktya9 and nostr:npub1yqmea6fpz4rn7v0wajetkxffedqttvy7mh7ltl9vkscygw9qclmqssvmx8 I think i understand your point better and should amend my statement.
I said that you must take personal responsibility for and accept the consequences of free speech.
I should have instead said that you must take personal responsibility to accept the fact that there will be consequences to speaking out.
You can be 100% justified in what you say and the response might be 100% fucked up. But the reality is that even merited speech has consequences in a society. Doesn't make the fucked up response justified, but there it is.
