Tuesday, August 29, 2017
Previous Posts
- NRO: A Compelling Case Against DACA
- Heather MacDonald: "Scandal Erupts Over The Promot...
- David Wong: "How Half Of America Lost Its F*cking ...
- Trump: I Pardoned Arpaio During Hurricane Because ...
- Not Looking Good For Silent Sam
- Man Who Claimed To Have Been Stabbed Because Of Hi...
- Peaceful Antifa Protesters Peacefully Surround Sus...
- Antifa Attacks Peaceful Right-Wing Protesters in B...
- Trump Set To Roll Back Limits On Military Gear For...
- Francisco Chairez: "The Year I Spent In Joe Arpaio...
Subscribe to
Posts [Atom]
1 Comments:
That statement was absolutely in bounds, obviously incredibly jerkish but not demanding blood in response, and shows how capricious PC censorship can be. I could totally see this sliding in most cases, but mistime the statement just slightly (while Harvey is happening) and you can be wrecked.
But I keep coming back to the point that procedural arguments are insufficient here, because clearly the moral formation undergirding free speech has eroded. We can't simply assume that political dissidents should have the ability to speak freely because what happens when censorship is applied to your side? Clearly PCs will censor whatever fashion demands, even if the person is ostensibly on their side.
So we need to defend jerks as necessary randomizers of a staid consensus. And we need to highlight the immense disproportionality of PC. This guy ultimately harmed no one, but the PCs stripped him of employment, which is really the most damaging punishment short of what is given to felons right now. So he is being convicted of a social capital crime for effectively nothing.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home