Matt Taibbi

Rank 32 of 47
|
Score -20
5/2/2024, 8:27:26 PM
X
In reply to:
CEO, Food Inc 🔻
@RantonBad
·
502d
@mtaibbi Jesus Matt, this is just a police press statement.

None of that shit is happening, and the escalations have 100% been a result of police and admin overreaction
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 '@RantonBad Police press statement? It’s a law school dean’s exposition on the heckler’s veto.' is part of a broader conversation on Twitter about the role of free speech, the First Amendment, and the actions of protesters versus state authorities. The statement is a critique of another user's comment comparing a police press statement to a law school dean's detailed exposition on the legal concept of the heckler's veto, which refers to a situation where allowing audience disruption silences the speaker's freedom of speech. This conversation engages with public issues related to free speech, protest actions, and legal interpretations, thus constituting public discourse.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement aims to clarify and contribute to the understanding of the heckler's veto in the context of free speech, indirectly promoting non-harmful discourse. [+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 the privacy and dignity of others, avoiding any personal attacks or disrespectful language. [+1]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    By contributing to a nuanced discussion on a complex legal and civic issue, the statement promotes understanding and potentially empathy among participants in the discourse. [+1]
  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 constructive criticism by challenging the comparison made by another user, focusing on the content rather than the individual. [+1]
  5. Principle 6:
    I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
    The statement uses its influence to engage in a meaningful discussion about important societal issues like free speech and legal rights. [+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 participating responsibly in a public debate on the topic. [+1]