Imagine, I mean imagine, saying this out loud. We do not ridicule these people enough. Imagine believing that today there are people, in this late hour, in this country, with our wealth, with our comfort, who just need some societal investment in order to avoid robbing strangers, or beating people in the streets, or raping the old lady who lives next door. Imagine saying this out loud. Imagine thinking that such people are worthy of the investment that would be required to get them to stop behaving in this way.
Imagine believing this!
No, we’re not going to spend money on helping these people avoid outcomes that everybody else in society easily avoids. We should spend no time or resources on that project.
The suggestion itself is offensive.
@prasad_sanyal@xwanyex I understand the analogy to abolition of slavery. But that's precisely the point under dispute. You're treating universal suffrage as a right that cannot be traded away for better outcomes. I'm asking why it should be treated that way.
The reason that conservatives tend to understand liberalism to a degree that liberals do not understand conservatism at the present moment isn’t about conservatives being smarter or more worldly; it’s because we live in a liberal society, so everybody understand liberalism. Liberalism is what’s taught in schools, it’s the morality in the background in TV and movies, it’s the worldview of most famous people, and so on.
We’ve all just been exposed to liberals and to liberalism to a degree that liberals have not been exposed to conservatives and conservatism.
You can sincerely value free speech and still believe threats or incitement are not protected, foreign nationals can be excluded, pornography should be restricted, and some speech should face social consequences. That's not hypocritical.
I think Glenn is right when he says the DW's commitment to free speech has limits. I just don't think they've ever claimed otherwise.
@KStarfucker@VoteBlueFYou@ggreenwald@exdjryan Did you read the article? If anything this supports the distinction. The government should not suppress lawful speech, pressure platforms, or blacklist media outlets.
Can you show me where Daily Wire claims to be free speech absolutists?
Nabokov was an opinionated snob I'm sure he disliked Eliot, but to what degree and why is debatable.
Your original point stands: Why enter a thread based on a misreading without verifying or noting it. Makes the whole argument weak and misguided. And then of course like any child who gets called out, "I wasn't talking about that."