To the left you have compelled speech—
The woke generation with their cancel culture.
To the right you have censorship—
Fake news coverage from the state press secretary.
Freedom of expression à la carte,
Take your pick, oh by the way,
When you get to the turn, you can’t turn back!
So what will it be?
I hope you weren’t looking for transparency,
Because we’re fresh out!
But if you’re afraid, to take that progressive turn,
I recommend, you stay with your old PC speech.
By: ElRoy © 2020
“I plead with you to control your tempers, to put a smile upon your faces, which will erase anger; speak out with words of love and peace, appreciation, and respect. If you will do this, your lives will be without regret. Your marriages and family relationships will be preserved. You will be much happier. You will do greater good. You will feel a sense of peace that will be wonderful.” By: Gordon B. Hinckley
The real debate here is not about the principle of free speech, but the much grayer question of how we draw its boundaries. What kinds of speech should be morally out of bounds? What sorts of speakers should be excluded from major platforms? When can giving a platform to one kind of person actually make it harder for other people to speak their minds freely? Once we see that these are the issues we’re actually discussing, it becomes clear that “cancel culture” is not the existential threat to free expression it’s made out to be. “Drawing the lines of socially acceptable expression and determining appropriate responses to transgressing those norms.” That’s not a conflict over the principles of a free society but the rules that govern its operation in practice. Excerpt from The “free speech debate” isn’t really about free speech
“Without the Free Press there is no Democracy. Without Democracy there is no Free Press.” By: A. Freeman
“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the convinced Communist, but people for whom the distinction between true and false no longer exists.” By: Hannah Arendt