That's fine. However, the nature of the threat from the Right is exponentially worse than the threat from the Left. If you only read this newsletter you'd be led to believe the opposite.
That's fine. However, the nature of the threat from the Right is exponentially worse than the threat from the Left. If you only read this newsletter you'd be led to believe the opposite.
That is not how I read the piece AT ALL. I do not follow your thinking here. After reading it I still think the threat from the Right is worse and more dangerous but I do see that some on the illiberal Left do the same thing on the other "side." Can we not be honest about it? Sometimes both sides DO do it. Even in degrees.
Because both sides do absolutely everything if you look hard enough. Generally only one side is sufficiently mobilized on a particular issue to truly pose an immediate threat though. As JVL pointed out in a post a few weeks ago the right has so many structural advantages for at least a decade that the left can barely hope to do anything but keep a stalemate. The right is also completely mobilized on these illiberal things while the left is very fragmented and the illiberal part is a an isolated part of the progressive piece of the party. Don't let social media fool you into thinking otherwise. Perhaps we should be focusing on the fact we have no water right now and temporarily ignore the fact that our rations will only last another year?
The Right is using government to police speech. The Left is not.
This newsletter spent 8 short paragraphs on the Right using government to limit speech and ideas and then went into a 29 paragraph long tirade about the Left talking about not liking certain books and a couple of bookstores choosing not to sell Harry Potter books (which is also an exercise in free speech).
The Right is using government to actually restrict speech and ban books with the full buy-in of its political leadership. The Left has some far out outliers deciding they don't want to support some speech independent of government and the Left's political leadership has not stepped up to support them.
And what is worse is that these government pursued policies effect textbooks that the whole country will be forced to use. Many of these textbooks will offer a totally whitewashed version of history. And math textbooks too- what is up with that totally egregious use of government power!
I must disagree. Restriction of speech that does not have a nexus with physical violence and is motivated primarily by philosophy or politics is abhorrent, period. That means both the right-wing book-banning/burning and the left-wing speech codes, which often are overreactions to each other. There are plenty of center-left mediums that have noted the excesses of leftist academics, students, and politicians - it's not just an obsession of rightward pundits.
That's true. All my Republican friends are quite annoyed with the extremism coming from the right. And my liberal friends, when I ask about canceling Harry Potter or the classics, roll their eyes at such nonsense.
The privately owned bookstores are also wrong. The law USED to say -- perhaps it has gone the way of antitrust and other guardrails -- that a public business, a business open to the PUBLIC, cannot discriminate, cannot impose the personal opinions of its owners. I suppose the Gay Cake Case stopped all that. But the premise remains that if you are open to the public you must be open to all the public; you cannot pick and choose. If you want to be private and impose your private opinions then open a CLUB! So I'm not saying don't stop GOVT from censorship (does that mean there is no longer such a thing as pornography or yelling Fire! in a crowded theatre??), I'm saying stop BOTH from doing it in public forums.
That's fine. However, the nature of the threat from the Right is exponentially worse than the threat from the Left. If you only read this newsletter you'd be led to believe the opposite.
I agree; it is private businesses versus the government.
That is not how I read the piece AT ALL. I do not follow your thinking here. After reading it I still think the threat from the Right is worse and more dangerous but I do see that some on the illiberal Left do the same thing on the other "side." Can we not be honest about it? Sometimes both sides DO do it. Even in degrees.
Because both sides do absolutely everything if you look hard enough. Generally only one side is sufficiently mobilized on a particular issue to truly pose an immediate threat though. As JVL pointed out in a post a few weeks ago the right has so many structural advantages for at least a decade that the left can barely hope to do anything but keep a stalemate. The right is also completely mobilized on these illiberal things while the left is very fragmented and the illiberal part is a an isolated part of the progressive piece of the party. Don't let social media fool you into thinking otherwise. Perhaps we should be focusing on the fact we have no water right now and temporarily ignore the fact that our rations will only last another year?
The Right is using government to police speech. The Left is not.
This newsletter spent 8 short paragraphs on the Right using government to limit speech and ideas and then went into a 29 paragraph long tirade about the Left talking about not liking certain books and a couple of bookstores choosing not to sell Harry Potter books (which is also an exercise in free speech).
The Right is using government to actually restrict speech and ban books with the full buy-in of its political leadership. The Left has some far out outliers deciding they don't want to support some speech independent of government and the Left's political leadership has not stepped up to support them.
So they aren't doing the "same thing" at all.
And what is worse is that these government pursued policies effect textbooks that the whole country will be forced to use. Many of these textbooks will offer a totally whitewashed version of history. And math textbooks too- what is up with that totally egregious use of government power!
You're welcome!
I must disagree. Restriction of speech that does not have a nexus with physical violence and is motivated primarily by philosophy or politics is abhorrent, period. That means both the right-wing book-banning/burning and the left-wing speech codes, which often are overreactions to each other. There are plenty of center-left mediums that have noted the excesses of leftist academics, students, and politicians - it's not just an obsession of rightward pundits.
That's true. All my Republican friends are quite annoyed with the extremism coming from the right. And my liberal friends, when I ask about canceling Harry Potter or the classics, roll their eyes at such nonsense.
The privately owned bookstores are also wrong. The law USED to say -- perhaps it has gone the way of antitrust and other guardrails -- that a public business, a business open to the PUBLIC, cannot discriminate, cannot impose the personal opinions of its owners. I suppose the Gay Cake Case stopped all that. But the premise remains that if you are open to the public you must be open to all the public; you cannot pick and choose. If you want to be private and impose your private opinions then open a CLUB! So I'm not saying don't stop GOVT from censorship (does that mean there is no longer such a thing as pornography or yelling Fire! in a crowded theatre??), I'm saying stop BOTH from doing it in public forums.
The law never said that bookstores have to carry every book. There isn't a bookstore big enough.
Wow. Twisted AND Confused. I will retire from the fray..... (but I take your point; thanks for the clarification, if not the abuse.)