FREE SPEECH ARGUMENTS!

  • 4 months ago
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. discusses the complexities of freedom of speech, questioning the contradiction of allowing violent ideologies like Marxism while advocating for speech restrictions. He opposes government intervention in regulating medical misinformation, warning against the potential for abuse by those with vested interests. Kennedy highlights the risks of granting authorities unchecked power over speech regulation and criticizes the lack of critical discourse on these important issues. His plea for transparency reflects his deep concerns about censorship and misinformation in society.

Join the PREMIUM philosophy community on the web for free!

Get my new series on the Truth About the French Revolution, the Truth About Sadism, access to the audiobook for my new book 'Peaceful Parenting,' StefBOT-AI, private livestreams, premium call in shows, the 22 Part History of Philosophers series and more!

See you soon!

https://freedomain.locals.com/support/promo/UPB2022
Transcript
00:00 So Robert F. Kennedy Jr. was asked, I assume by some leftist, he had his genuine proletariat
00:07 little hat on.
00:08 And he was asked about sort of two questions and I'm sorry to sound so weary but it's just
00:14 so sad how little thought people put into these questions or these answers.
00:19 So the question was twofold and it was around freedom of speech.
00:22 So the first question was, well what if somebody is directly inciting violence?
00:28 Should that not be a violation of freedom of speech and banned and shut down and so
00:32 on?
00:33 I'm like, all right, all right.
00:34 Well, first of all, there are laws against that already so you don't need anything extra.
00:39 But I guess the question I would have is there are tens of thousands of outright Marxists
00:45 in Western universities teaching impressionable youth and Lord knows how many there are in
00:52 public schools as a whole.
00:53 Now Marxism explicitly calls for a violent overthrow, a bloody revolution and so on in
01:01 order to establish the dictatorship of the proletariat and the eventual utopia of the
01:06 stateless society.
01:07 So I suppose if people were really fussed and bothered and concerned about, I don't
01:12 know, speech that not only theoretically in its language promotes the use of political
01:19 violence and terrorism to change the world, but you know the communist revolutions have
01:24 actually been enacted around the world and have caused the slaughter of well over 100
01:29 million people.
01:30 So it would seem to me that if anybody was concerned about, I don't know, political
01:37 violent speech that the first thing they would say is, man we gotta ban all of these communists
01:42 you see because communism is explicitly violent in its formulation, theory, execution and
01:48 practice.
01:51 But of course they never talk about it.
01:54 Why does nobody talk about this?
01:55 I don't understand the world.
01:57 This is so blindingly obvious, right?
02:00 Oh, promotion of violence.
02:01 I don't know, how about promotion of violent bloody revolution, slaughtering your enemies
02:05 and liquidating entire classes of society.
02:08 Would that be considered, especially when it's happened in the world repeatedly, is
02:12 that something that we could classify as an incitement to violence?
02:16 But no, it's never so.
02:17 Of course they don't care, right?
02:19 They don't care, right?
02:20 I mean, what they care about is they say, well we want the right to ban speech that's
02:27 an incitement to violence so that we can define speech we disagree with as an incitement to
02:32 violence and ban it that way, right?
02:35 So it's, I mean the idea that people on the left care about incitement to violence when
02:39 it's sort of the foundation of the whole philosophy is pretty wild to me.
02:42 And I don't know why this is so hard for people to understand, why nobody's talking about
02:45 this, but I do what I do.
02:49 So that's number one.
02:51 Number two is the example was, well what about medical misinformation, right?
02:55 What about medical misinformation?
02:57 So let's say somebody says insulin is really, really bad for diabetics.
03:01 Shouldn't we ban that?
03:03 Now to his credit, I mean, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., he did say like absolutely not.
03:10 The government shouldn't have the right to decide what's true and what's false and so
03:13 on.
03:14 I mean, you know, that's fine.
03:15 It's sort of a statement, but I mean the foundational argument, of course, it's this belief that
03:22 the power you give to others will always be executed in the way that you like, right?
03:31 So these, I really want, I don't want there to be bad medical information out there.
03:36 Well, sure, of course.
03:37 Yeah, we understand that.
03:39 Absolutely.
03:40 So, so you give to the government the power or some organization the power to ban medical
03:47 misinformation.
03:48 You say, oh, well, the only thing that's going to get banned, you see, is medical misinformation.
03:53 Because I have this fantasy, I have these magic levers in my head that only the best
03:58 possible human beings are ever going to be in charge of banning speech.
04:02 No one's ever going to be drawn to that for nefarious, profit-driven, control-driven,
04:07 hierarchical, oligarchical, horrendous motives.
04:09 Never, never will happen because Lord knows sociopaths are never attracted to power.
04:14 So I'm going to create this magic lever to ban speech and only the most virtuous and
04:17 angelic and positive and wonderful people are ever going to have a hold of it.
04:21 Oh my God.
04:24 Oh my God.
04:27 The power I surrender will only ever be used to benefit me.
04:31 It's hilarious.
04:33 I mean, absolutely hellscape godforsaken, but bitterly funny.
04:40 So if you have the power to ban medical misinformation, well, what's going to happen?
04:51 Well, if you have a very profitable drug, and we can't think of anything off the top
04:55 of our heads, I'm sure, but if you have some very profitable drug, then you will simply
05:00 influence the government to use that power to ban alternative treatments to your very
05:04 profitable drug by calling those alternative treatments medical misinformation.
05:08 And that way you get this fascistic control over state apparatus in order to make profits
05:14 and frankly, potentially cause a lot of deaths.
05:20 So the idea that there's this objective category called medical misinformation and there's
05:28 this magic, perfect, honorable epistemological lever that's only ever going to be pulled
05:32 by perfect angels and that nobody will ever take that power and abuse it for their own
05:36 benefit at the harm of the general population is just wild.
05:41 You know, I mean, the left is founded on accusations of infinite exploitation by capitalists who
05:47 actually can't force anyone in the free market to consume any of their goods or pay them
05:51 a single penny.
05:52 So they say, you know what?
05:53 Human nature is intensely prone.
05:56 It's intensely prone to exploiting others.
05:59 So let's give a small group of people all the power in their own universe.
06:03 I mean, it's madness.
06:05 And I don't know why this is hard for people to argue, but I don't, the reason I'm recording
06:09 this, I don't see any of these arguments anywhere.
06:12 I find it wild.
06:13 I tell me, tell me why.
06:15 Help me understand why this is blindingly obvious stuff.
06:18 Why does nobody make these arguments?
06:19 I don't understand.
06:21 Please enlighten me.