I wish I were exaggerating when I say the objective of the Neoreactionary movement is the reversal of democracy and human rights, and an intention to install a monarch CEO over America. Alas, that is how they describe their stance in their own words
(
Read more... )
Comments 9
He has some interesting ideas, if you don't take them too literally. One point he makes is that we are all living in the fallout from the French Revolution and its invention of left/right politics as we know it: like fish, we tend to be blind to the water we swim in, so a lot of what we take for granted is actually quite revolutionary compared to the equillibrium state throughout most of human history prior to the 1770s. Actually, a chunk of this goes back further (to the Wars of the Three Kingdoms in the 1640s, or maybe the 30 Years War at roughly the same time -- which in turn were fallout from the Reformation). But not that much further in its modern form ( ... )
Reply
Reply
Reply
For example. Suppose I insult my friend Alfred. A consequence might be that our relationship is permanently strained, at best; and at worst, that he refuses to associate with me. Some speech is inconsequential, but most has consequences.
Inevitably, the only way to make "freedom of speech" into an absolute with no consequences would be to erase other freedoms, such as my freedom of association. Or my freedom of thought to dislike someone else for what they said. A consequence can be as simple as me disagreeing with Alfred and saying so, causing Alfred to wring his hands because he considers this an insult to his vaunted intelligence. The only way to prevent that consequence is to take away my freedom of speech.
This illustrates how the word "freedom" always has a huge number of meanings, because it almost always involves multiple simultaneous competing "freedoms" (plural) of every size, and every level of importance.
Reply
I don't think freedom of speech should be an absolute (outside of government), but I think it's the right thing to do to at least try to respect it as a major consideration. It would be one thing if this guy was going to be talking about neo-reactionism, but he wasn't; people just noticed a way they could punish him.
I don't think you're talking about different meanings of freedom, just the fact that there are sometimes tradeoffs between the freedom of different people.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment