zlacker

>>tosh+(OP)
> resistance must not be allowed to harden into its own brand of dogma or coercion—which right-wing demagogues are already exploiting.

I get it. This is aimed at left-wing people who think their side can do no evil and thus proceed to censor any disagreement. But it's still funny to me that this whole thing needs to be preceded with 'the right is bad, but believe it or not, people on the left might do some bad things too', as if any side has a monopoly on virtue and goodness.

>>insick+1m
What would be the left-wing analogy to President Trump rallying against the attacks on Confederate symbols (e.g. flag ban at NASCAR, taking down of statues) and using it as a purported example of liberal hypocrisy regarding tolerance and freedom of speech?

edit: This is a genuine question, not whataboutism. The letter is obviously very keyed to the current situation, rather than just a broad defense of free expression. Many of the signatories are presumably worried that backlash to perceived unchecked movements on the left will lead to the Trump administration retaining power. The parent commenter suggests that this kind of letter would be written in a vacuum, and I disagree.

>>danso+4n
It’s a good question.

Maybe a Dem POTUS rallying against cops as they try to stop protestors from confiscating and destroying various means of production?

>>aklemm+ir
Maybe a closer variant would be a Democratic POTUS trying to argue that conservatives unabashed support for police justifies a greater expansion of state policing powers. But it doesn't quite feel right as an analogy because supporting police powers has generally been the status quo no matter the prevailing party. Whereas the leftist purported push to censor or bully speech doesn't feel anywhere near an entrenched status quo, even if you really think Twitter is real life.