Harper's Letter on Justice and Open Debate

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jul/08/is-free-speech-under-threat-cancel-culture-writers-respond

Some fairly interesting commentary on this in the Guardian. Though I disagree with much of her argument, Nesrine Malik has laid the groundwork for a clever argument to get lefties on board against the worst kinds of cancellation:

In my view, the failure to make these distinctions clear is probably less an oversight and more of a convenient fudge. Because outrage about cancel culture can’t be credibly sustained when you start breaking down what it actually consists of. Companies hastily sacking people who have been mobbed online is about the bottom line and fear of bad PR. It raises interesting questions, but these are more about employment rights and the encroachment by bosses into areas of private opinion and conduct. Being piled on online is nasty, but it is broadly a function of how social media in particular and the internet in general has enabled bullying for the hell of it. Sometimes human beings are unpleasant, and certain platforms are designed to bring out the worst in them. That is separate to the demands for change emerging from many marginalised groups.

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

https://mobile.twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1281224333738852354
Another signatory begging the 'free speech' activists to stop harassing another critic of the letter.

You assume he's doing that because he's appalled with their behaviour rather than because he fears being fired if he doesn't go out to bat for her. I doubt that assumption is a given considering his recent interactions with Ezra Klein and his decision to purge his entire Twitter feed.

Regardless, "Some of this proposal's supporters suck, so it's bad," is a terrible, terrible argument and the basis of many awful policies/campaigns. It is, after all, what Trump is running against police reform on.