If you didn't know by now, let me tell you. I'm a free speech absolutist.
That means I believe in the freedom of expression, association, and, of course, speech, for anyone and any idea.
There are certain limitations odd place, like defamatory speech,
that leads to individuals having severe economic burdens.
These economic burdens would have to be proven in court, of course.
But besides that I think you should have the right to say whatever you want to say, to anyone at all.
"I know not what course others may take. But as for me, GIVE ME LIBERTY! OR GIVE ME DEATH!"
Let me put it this way. If you want to call me a nigger (so hate speech) I will defend your right to say that.
If you don't want to serve me food because I'm black (so association)
I'll defend your right to do whatever you want to do in your private business.
If you don't wanna call me by my correct pronoun, like these triggered snowflakes here,
I will be offended, but also, I will defend your right to call me whatever the hell you want.
Furthermore, I mean, who cares if I'm offended!
That doesn't mean what you're saying is wrong, and it doesn't mean I should work to silence you.
But sadly that's the kind of world we live in.
Vast amounts of people agree with loosened limitations on the freedom of speech.
For example, it is commonplace for young people to censor their own peers.
According to the Pew Research Center, up to 40% of young people think its okay to limit speech that is offensive to minorities.
They have been pulling data that goes all the way up to 50%, a whole half of young people,
which is stupid, because that just makes people want to say more offensive things.
Plus, what if a minority says offensive things?
Like, what if I called someone a nigger.
Or..or like, what if I said Asians make for bad drivers?
Don't I, as a racist, deserve to be slapped with hate speech charges too?
If you still don't believe me; if you think for some reason that young people are more enlightened,
check out this clip of me talking to normal, young Canadian university students.
Do you think university campuses, such as the university campus you're on,
should stamp out hateful and offensive speech?
>>Yes, because it's their responsibility to keep students safe.
>>I agree.
>>I think they should. I think universities should be a free space, where, uh,
no hate should be allowed.
>>It should be a safe space for....
>>Safe space for anyone to come to. Hey, when you're coming to school, like, you don't expect to be, like,
treated badly or anything. You're just here to get an education, man. And that's what....
>>Do you think the Canadian government should stamp out hateful and offensive speech?
>>Yeah. I think every organization too. It's not only school or government.
>>They should legally stamp out hate speech.
>>Yeah.
>>Uh, so like if someone says the n-word or something that is offensive they should stamp it out?
Even if it's not necessarily violent.
>>If it's like, a black person saying it, then that's their choice, but like I don't think white people should say it or, I don't know.
Yeah, if you're not.
I guess everyone has a right to say what they want, but like, especially in, like, school spaces and stuff, that's supposed to be a safe space,
so I don't think it's really okay.
>>Unfortunately, these young people don't strongly believe in the fundamental freedoms that separate us from totalitarian countries.
Ironically, back in the day (1960s, the groovin' 60s), it was young people who led the free speech movement.
Now young people turn their backs on what others have fought for.
You might be wondering who taught them this.
It wasn't their parents. The parents were the ones who fought for free speech rights when they were young, after all.
It was the universities, especially the humanities and social sciences,
that taught them to think this way about free speech.
Postmodernism is the academic branch in which all of this derives from.
Postmodernism is the idea that everything, including value systems, should be questioned.
This kind of thinking could be useful for the arts, as such concepts like aesthetic beauty is subjective.
However postmodernism thinking expands to the sciences, too.
The empirical quest for the truth of the natural world.
The not-so-great postmodernist thinkers question the certainty that objectivists had on our perception of reality.
But unlike the stoics, or epicurists, postmodernists have no interest in adequately replacing science.
Instead, postmodernists want to replace objectiveness with their own thoughts, their own subjective thoughts.
Think of infinite genders, for an example.
There are mountains of evidence that points towards gender, and even gender expression (so fashion)
being connected with biological sex.
But there is no scientific evidence that there are three genders, or sixty genders,
yet activists angrily try to convince people that their made-up genders exist.
The reason why they do it is because postmodernists have brainwashed them
into thinking that their subjective versions of reality is equivalent to the objective truth.
Now, as Jordan Peterson explained to me in an interview,
postmodernism is inherently nihilistic.
It leads you nowhere, because the very purpose of postmodernism is to constantly question reality.
If you're constantly questioning reality, and getting no answers, well, then you're stuck in an existential crisis.
A kind of cosmic pessimism.
However there are two kinds of nihilists.
There are passive nihilists (they usually kill themselves),
then there are active nihilists.
And these people tend to adopt personal, all-encompassing ideologies like Marxism.
The majority of postmodernist thinkers were active nihilists.
But not only were they active nihilists, they were Marxists.
That's not a coincidence, by the way.
The reason why postmodernists tend to be Marxists is because at the root of Marxism is personal identity.
Of course, the personal identities are used for wider political movements and activism.
And for postmodernists, a people who have questioned everything away - even their objectiveness, they've questioned it away -
what is truly left for them?
Wh...what is truly left for them on this earth?
Their subjective, personal identities they've built around themselves.
Therefore, these people have nothing else to live for, no other beliefs to hold,
no other purposes in life besides what they've subjectively created.
And they fight for that as they try to fight for Marxist power struggles.
That is all these deluded people ever do.
Now, do all these people who echo anti-free speech rhetoric think this way?
Mm...perhaps not.
But this is the bedrock, the fundamental basis, the philosophical basis where all these people derive their ideas from.
If enough people think like the postmodernists, the nihilists, and Marxists do - let's say 5% of people think this way -
we get a whole lot of censorship.
It's not that they necessarily think we're inherently dangerous people.
It's that they literally think us dissenting against their ideas is us dissenting against who they are,
their fundamental being as a person.
And therefore, it's hate speech to disagree with them.
To disagree with them is tantamount to a crime.
>>[Chanting] Yo black boy, you're a fascist.
>>I'm not - you think I'm a fascist, but I'm not a fascist. I disagree with fascism.
>>...on the right wing. Left wing people cannot be fascist. Look in the fucking dictionary you idiot.
>>I consider myself a classical liberal. I consider myself a -
>>I don't give a shit how you identify.
>>I'm not a white supremacist, they think I'm a white supremacist.
>>[Chanting] Fuck white supremacy.
>>Guys, I'm not a white supremacist, I promise you.
I promise you.
At the end of the day, I might not believe in what you're saying, but I will defend your right to say that,
because, in a truly open and free society, we should have the right to say,
pretty much whatever the hell we want to say,
as long as we're not directly harming others.
Free speech is more than just a legal, or philosophical, or political term,
it's a principle to way of life.
Free speech is a matter in which you conduct yourself,
it's a matter in which you treat others.
I used to be proud of my generation.
Now I can't be anymore.
We're no longer tolerant, we're no longer an accepting generation.
Instead, we're a generation of active nihilists, driven mad by our good-for-nothing Marxist identity politics.
I'm Jay Fayza, from therebel.media.
If you want to intellectually battle those who are against free speech, like and subscribe to therebel.media.