How far are you willing to go in defense of free speech? I discuss this question in my latest piece for The Loftus Party:
Our commitment to showing over doing is such that we often have to show the world how repellent we find certain speech before we can talk about our support for the legality of that speech. “Ann Coulter’s a monster, but she shouldn’t be prevented from speaking at Berkeley,” is the most common example. Such a statement has a trifold purpose: it signals our tribal affiliation (not-Trump, not-Coulter, not-Murray); shows our commitment to free speech rights; and displays that we’re willing to get our hands just a tiny bit dirty, ideologically speaking, by suggesting that someone we don’t like should not be torn apart by an angry, smelly mob of progressives. So it’s at least as important to not be misidentified as a member of a certain tribe as it is to show our support for free speech.
It gets political, so put on your hip waders and click to read the rest.