Freedom of speech has a cultural dimension as well as a legal one. Legally, it means that the government must not punish people for their expression, except when it violates the rights of others (e.g., clear threats). Cultural respect for free speech is also important. Where it exists, people have room to express their opinions, even when most people disapprove of them. If it goes away, legal protections for free speech are likely to follow.
Cultural freedom of speech doesn’t mean an obligation to grant a platform or to refrain from criticism. The best way to describe it is going after ideas rather than people when possible. Saying that an idea is horrible is one thing. Saying that the person who said it horrible is a stronger charge and can do more damage. This doesn’t mean we should never condemn people for what they say, but it should be reserved for the most serious cases.
(more…)
As fans energetically discuss the aftermath of the Chengdu Worldcon, some are thinking about the risks of future Worldcons in countries with a bad record on free speech and human rights. There are some issues with the UK, which is hosting this year’s convention, but it’s too late to change it. Let’s look ahead to the bid for Kampala in 2028.
There’s never been a Worldcon in Africa, and that helps to make the idea attractive. The bid website talks about Uganda’s literary history:
(more…)
My latest article for Liberty Fund’s Online Library of Liberty, “The Peasants’ War and Martin Luther,” is now online. Marxist claims have largely dominated historical discussions of the Peasants’ War, but it was a revolt in defense of property rights, not against them. Its Twelve Articles contain ideas that appeared in the United States’ Declaration of Independence.
“One down. Two to go. This forced resignation of the president of @Penn is the bare minimum of what is required.”
That’s the kind of language you might expect from the Minister of Truth in a socialist dictatorship. It’s from Elise Stefanik, a Congresswoman from New York. The offense for which Stefanik and many others are seeking to remove three university presidents is the failure to regard advocacy of genocide unconditionally as harassment.
(more…)