The Pomo-Prog Left Aims To Stifle *All* Disagreement

The contemporary postmodern progressive left wants to stifle--and, ultimately, outlaw--all "hate speech." That's bad, of course. But what people tend to leave out is crucial and well-known: it has an utterly daft, extremely expansive conception of "hate" and "hate speech." Consider racism alone--this left thinks that basically everything it doesn't like, anywhere in the vicinity of race, is racist. Basically everything is racist according to them. So, granting them the power to stifle "racist" speech is granting them the right to stifle just about any speech. 

   This is partially because they're just crazy, but partially it's the properly postmodern part of the view--every interpretation is just as good (or, better: just as bad) as every other interpretation. 'There's a dog' doesn't mean There's a dog to any greater degree than it means 2+2=7, or It was the best of times, it was the dinosaur of times, or There's a cat...or nothing at all. But it's mostly because progressivism is just crazy. Though one of the reasons it's crazy is: it actually wants to implement wacko philosophical speculation that ought to be isolated to the classroom.

   Of course they don't even want to stop with "hate speech"--and not even when fortified by their absurdly expansive conception of "hate." They've also suggested, for example, that climate-change "denial" be made illegal. Ditto inquiry into racial differences. Of course they (via Big Tech) have already stifled whatever facts about Wuhan virus disease they found distasteful--e.g. that the virus is properly called 'Wuhan virus,' that it probably escaped from a Chinese lab, that it's not very dangerous to most people...etc. 

   Wanting to stifle speech--the illiberal extremist's perpetual fever dream--is bad enough when you want to stifle some narrow range of speech. It's even worse when what you really want to do is stifle all disagreement--as contemporary progressives want to do.