Thank you for this. I am one of those many people who disagreed with much of what Charlie Kirk said. For that reason, it never occurred to me to attend one of his events. While I may or may not agree, I also believe that we all have the right to state our opinions. When I rebut, I try hard to make sure I have the facts right. Holdover from high school debate. I'm subscribed now.
For this to happen we need to do something with instant communication world.
With you on the subject itself, we gotta be able to talk freely when we want to.
However, those folks who are often “offended” are not at fault entirely. When incessantly repeated, radioactive-background like, fast, reactionary, target-marketed“engagement content” is always trying hard to find new edge, those of us who are naturally more cool to slights have to be a bit more understanding of the “sensitive” types. This is not normal human disagreements in conversations anymore. It is the market of find peoples’ buttons to press. And it’s wearing everyone thin to be constantly in this noise. 😳
I love the idea of "civic courage" — but we need to move beyond discussions of what society should look like and actually put in the work to get there. I would love to see efforts (by FIRE and/or other organizations) to teach young people how to regulate emotions, how to think critically, how to have civil debate and how to disagree respectfully. Because it's apparent that many young people today were not properly prepared for such a world.
I believe teachers who gleefully celebrate someone's brutal murder in either classroom discussion or online platforms are not fit for the job. Aside from the fact many have morals clauses in their contracts, these people are expected to be role models. If that feels too onerous for them, then they need to find other work.
I am a former teacher and the level of crazy I see coming from some of the teachers working these days blows me away. Totally inappropriate, especially for k-8, and often even 9-12. Parents have a right to expect a certain level of sanity and decorum in those entrusted with their children's education.
Do you really mean to write: "The response on the political right has been no less dangerous:"
when you follow your colon with: "the urge to answer a murder with censorship or official punishment of vile speech"? In what world is an act of censorship or official punishment _no less dangerous_ than the slaughtering of a human being?
I agree with everything you say in your essay. I only think your rhetorical effort to show an equivalence between the response of the political left and the response of the political right is inapt. The responses are not equivalent.
A fair response, but I can't help but to think we may very well see an equivalence over time. I firmly see a lot of accountability in order on both sides of the aisle. The us vs. them dynamic is pretty grim right now.
The term they're using now is stochastic terrorism. Statistically speaking, anyone with a platform should know that they are inciting action from a percentage of their followers. The problem is that as in this case you can't predict how words effect people's actions. Trying to do so is a kind of social heat death...and its happening in the UK.
I am all for protecting free speech, especially speech I strongly disagree with. That line matters. But it feels dangerously naïve to pretend words are ‘just speech’ when people with big platforms can use that influence in ways that incite or normalize real harm. Words don’t pull a trigger, but they can absolutely create the climate where someone else does
Thank you for this. I am one of those many people who disagreed with much of what Charlie Kirk said. For that reason, it never occurred to me to attend one of his events. While I may or may not agree, I also believe that we all have the right to state our opinions. When I rebut, I try hard to make sure I have the facts right. Holdover from high school debate. I'm subscribed now.
For this to happen we need to do something with instant communication world.
With you on the subject itself, we gotta be able to talk freely when we want to.
However, those folks who are often “offended” are not at fault entirely. When incessantly repeated, radioactive-background like, fast, reactionary, target-marketed“engagement content” is always trying hard to find new edge, those of us who are naturally more cool to slights have to be a bit more understanding of the “sensitive” types. This is not normal human disagreements in conversations anymore. It is the market of find peoples’ buttons to press. And it’s wearing everyone thin to be constantly in this noise. 😳
I love the idea of "civic courage" — but we need to move beyond discussions of what society should look like and actually put in the work to get there. I would love to see efforts (by FIRE and/or other organizations) to teach young people how to regulate emotions, how to think critically, how to have civil debate and how to disagree respectfully. Because it's apparent that many young people today were not properly prepared for such a world.
I believe teachers who gleefully celebrate someone's brutal murder in either classroom discussion or online platforms are not fit for the job. Aside from the fact many have morals clauses in their contracts, these people are expected to be role models. If that feels too onerous for them, then they need to find other work.
I am a former teacher and the level of crazy I see coming from some of the teachers working these days blows me away. Totally inappropriate, especially for k-8, and often even 9-12. Parents have a right to expect a certain level of sanity and decorum in those entrusted with their children's education.
Dear Mr. Lukianoff:
Do you really mean to write: "The response on the political right has been no less dangerous:"
when you follow your colon with: "the urge to answer a murder with censorship or official punishment of vile speech"? In what world is an act of censorship or official punishment _no less dangerous_ than the slaughtering of a human being?
I agree with everything you say in your essay. I only think your rhetorical effort to show an equivalence between the response of the political left and the response of the political right is inapt. The responses are not equivalent.
James Addis
Hackensack, New Jersey
A fair response, but I can't help but to think we may very well see an equivalence over time. I firmly see a lot of accountability in order on both sides of the aisle. The us vs. them dynamic is pretty grim right now.
The term they're using now is stochastic terrorism. Statistically speaking, anyone with a platform should know that they are inciting action from a percentage of their followers. The problem is that as in this case you can't predict how words effect people's actions. Trying to do so is a kind of social heat death...and its happening in the UK.
I am all for protecting free speech, especially speech I strongly disagree with. That line matters. But it feels dangerously naïve to pretend words are ‘just speech’ when people with big platforms can use that influence in ways that incite or normalize real harm. Words don’t pull a trigger, but they can absolutely create the climate where someone else does
Another take on violence https://torrancestephensphd.substack.com/p/cant-claim-being-american-running