• PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    The limits are violence, no? The point of free speech is that the government doesn’t get to use violence against you for words. When that turns into actions such as violence or credible threats, then self defence and law enforcement come into play.

    If you meant that their intolerant language should warrant intolerance from you, then great, that’s covered under free speech. But that’s not what you mean, you want to respond to intolerant language with violence and want to pick which language is intolerant enough.

    • southsamurai@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ah, I’d say that when it’s the government, any application of the power of state against speech has to be rigorously prevented. Not just violence.

      I’m not claiming perfection for myself, I do hold contradictory beliefs (on the surface anyway, underneath they’re extensions of a more complex thought process). But, yeah, there’s a point at which intolerance becomes such a threat to a stable society that only eradicating it when it arises is going to allow for stability. Once you get into nazi territory, all bets are off for me.