Alan Dershowitz: Let me start with a statement that many will disagree with. No country in history has ever really tested free speech: has seen whether the marketplace of ideas works or whether we can really have a society without censorship; where every idea is tested only on its merits, rather than for political benefit. This cannot be a right-left issue. Elon, you may be the first person who has really tried. Thomas Jefferson, Alexander Hamilton and Abraham Lincoln all compromised. You are trying, for the first time, a great experiment to see whether we can survive with a marketplace of ideas, without censorship, where all thoughts and all ideas are treated equally. For instance, where there are judgments on the basis of whether something is pro-right, pro-life, anti-Jewish, pro-Christian, anti-Christian. What we need is to create a circle in which things that are illegal, such as abusing children, are
I really wish Dershowitz when realize the dangers from the far left. Jewish people are being attacked in the most left-wing districts not by right-wingers, but left wing progressives.
"One cannot draw a line on hate speech. One person's hate speech is another person's love speech."...I think not. Most reasonable and rational people have a pretty good idea what constitute "hate" speech. In most industrialised countries of the world, "hate" speech is specifically regulated. For example in continental North America: Section 319 of the Criminal Code of Canada bans the incitement of hatred and the wilful promotion of hatred. In British Columbia, hate speech is prohibited by both B.C.'s Human Rights Code and Canada's Criminal Code. The Human Rights Code also prohibits discriminatory speech, which is similar to hate speech. In opposition, the United States does not have hate speech laws.
Yet every speaker and listener in the United States has the right and ability to counter the presumed hate in the speech or idea offered that offended. Cutting out hate speech by ruling over it judicially will not change the thought process, while dialogue is the gift the First Amendment grants to change one another’s thoughts.
Great discussion. THere was no mention of science and technology in the conversation. Two examples. Dr. Fauci in a Congressional hearing that "I.am science" He was rhe highest paid employee in the federal government. This statement is his legacy. Opposite example. Elon Musk is a creative genius. However, I think Space X is a great achievement but, EVs are a waste of time and money
Interesting post. While I agree it is somewhat beneficial to listen to all "legal" ideas, you cannot then be mad when, after listening, most of the population then disregards your idea as ridiculous and no longer feels the need to continue listening. For example, I do not need to hear the arguments of Flat Earthers, no matter how impassioned they may be. The fact that so many people respond and then tune out, shut off, or "cancel" the ideas that are so repugnant, disgusting, or ridiculous, does not mean it is an infringement of free speech. I find that most people claim their free speech has been infringed upon when in reality, nope, you've said something most people do not agree with and are now tuning you out. You can keep saying it all you want, but if somebody doesn't give you a microphone, don't cry about it.
A remarkable conversation. It would make the Founding Fathers proud. And, not from WASPS.
I really wish Dershowitz when realize the dangers from the far left. Jewish people are being attacked in the most left-wing districts not by right-wingers, but left wing progressives.
That has been my perception as well.
If Elon were serious, he would reinstate all the MAGA accts permanently suspended on J8. I have tried to get my acct unsuspended twice to no effect.
This is a joke, I hope...
"One cannot draw a line on hate speech. One person's hate speech is another person's love speech."...I think not. Most reasonable and rational people have a pretty good idea what constitute "hate" speech. In most industrialised countries of the world, "hate" speech is specifically regulated. For example in continental North America: Section 319 of the Criminal Code of Canada bans the incitement of hatred and the wilful promotion of hatred. In British Columbia, hate speech is prohibited by both B.C.'s Human Rights Code and Canada's Criminal Code. The Human Rights Code also prohibits discriminatory speech, which is similar to hate speech. In opposition, the United States does not have hate speech laws.
Yet every speaker and listener in the United States has the right and ability to counter the presumed hate in the speech or idea offered that offended. Cutting out hate speech by ruling over it judicially will not change the thought process, while dialogue is the gift the First Amendment grants to change one another’s thoughts.
Two of my heroes in this world. Thank you.
Great discussion. THere was no mention of science and technology in the conversation. Two examples. Dr. Fauci in a Congressional hearing that "I.am science" He was rhe highest paid employee in the federal government. This statement is his legacy. Opposite example. Elon Musk is a creative genius. However, I think Space X is a great achievement but, EVs are a waste of time and money
Dale Carnegie once said, " If you expect human beings to be rational creatures, You'll always be disappointed " Need I say more? I don't thinks so.
Interesting post. While I agree it is somewhat beneficial to listen to all "legal" ideas, you cannot then be mad when, after listening, most of the population then disregards your idea as ridiculous and no longer feels the need to continue listening. For example, I do not need to hear the arguments of Flat Earthers, no matter how impassioned they may be. The fact that so many people respond and then tune out, shut off, or "cancel" the ideas that are so repugnant, disgusting, or ridiculous, does not mean it is an infringement of free speech. I find that most people claim their free speech has been infringed upon when in reality, nope, you've said something most people do not agree with and are now tuning you out. You can keep saying it all you want, but if somebody doesn't give you a microphone, don't cry about it.