From an excellent N.Y. Times op-ed by Greg Lukianoff (FIRE):
If you're a free-speech lawyer, you face a choice: Either expect to be disappointed by people of all political stripes — or go crazy. I choose low expectations.
Again and again, political actors preach the importance of free speech, only to reach for the censor's muzzle when it helps their side. If, like me, you defend free speech as a principle rather than invoke it opportunistically, you get distressingly accustomed to seeing the same people take opposite positions on an issue, sometimes within the space of just a few months….
And he closes (after offering a good deal of detailed evidence),
I don't like having to make a case for human rights such as freedom of speech by appealing to self-interest; these are supposed to be rights whose importance transcends one's personal needs. But for political partisans, it's often the only argument that cuts through. So here's my practical warning: The weapon that you reach for today will be used against you tomorrow…. [T]he point of the principle of free speech is that how we respond to ideas we don't like is ultimately not about our opponents' rights — it's about ours.
The post On Free Speech, "I Choose Low Expectations" appeared first on Reason.com.
