Matt Taibbi

Rank 32 of 47
|
Score -20
5/2/2024, 7:30:01 PM
X
In reply to:
crispy pad thai
@crispypadthai
·
502d
@mtaibbi @kthalps is that what you and your best friend bari weiss tell yourselves matt
Matt Taibbi
@mtaibbi
·
502d
@crispypadthai @kthalps He believes in free speech? I’m against the antisemitism laws as well.
crispy pad thai
@crispypadthai
·
502d
@mtaibbi @kthalps katie what’s up with your podcast cohost
Matt Taibbi
@mtaibbi
·
502d
No, they’re not. Shutting down events, shouting people down, blocking people from entering venues, that all violates the spirit and in some cases the letter of the First Amendment/free speech. Doing these things makes it hard to demand speech rights https://stanfordmag.org/contents…
Seth LeBlanc
@SethTheWhite
·
502d
@mtaibbi Those actions are also people exercising their right to speech, you don’t see the difference between that and armed agents of the state cracking down on peaceful protests?

The statement in question is part of a Twitter conversation thread discussing the balance between free speech and protest actions that might inhibit others' ability to speak or access platforms. The conversation touches on the interpretation and implications of the First Amendment in the context of protests and counter-protests, which is a substantive public issue. Therefore, this statement constitutes public discourse.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not appear to cause harm but lacks clarity in its intent, which could lead to misunderstandings. [+1]
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    The statement respects privacy and does not engage in harassment or hate speech. [+1]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement does not actively promote understanding, empathy, or compassion, focusing instead on clarifying the speaker's position without fostering deeper mutual understanding.
  4. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    The statement engages in a form of dialogue without resorting to personal attacks, focusing on clarifying a misunderstanding about the speaker's stance. [+1]
  5. Principle 6:
    I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
    The statement attempts to clarify a position on free speech, indirectly aiming to contribute positively to societal understanding of protest dynamics and free speech. [+1]
  6. Principle 7:
    I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.
    The statement upholds the principles of free speech by engaging in a discussion about its limits and implications, using the platform responsibly. [+1]