There Is No Free Speech Right to Say 'Women Are Property'; Those Who Say There Is Such a Right are Profoundly Wrong.
So-called "Freedom of Speech" is a bogus concept used by the rich to protect pro-oppression speech and organizing
If you, dear reader, think that people have a free speech right to advocate for making women property, that they have a right to go to a university campus with signs that say “Women are property” and “‘Types of property: women, slaves, animals, land, etc.,'“ then I say you are wrong.
These are the signs that were displayed by people recently on the Texas State University campus on Wednesday the day after the November 5 election.
I have written articles here and here about why people do not have a right to display such signs; they do not have this right because displaying such signs promotes oppression. Period. My articles refute all of the arguments that, in the name of “freedom of speech,” argue that people do have a right to display such signs. I challenge you, dear reader, if you believe people have a right to display these signs, to refute my arguments (in the comments) if you can. You can’t unless you flat out advocate oppression, but give it a try. Note that you need to actually read my articles linked to above in order first to find out what my arguments are, right?
Will you argue that we need to let people display these signs in order to have a robust conversation about whether or not to make women property, and that this requires allowing all opinions on the question to be heard? Really! That’s your argument?
Will you argue that the only way anti-oppression speech can be defended against repression of it is by guaranteeing oppressors the freedom to use speech to organize oppression? Really? That’s your argument? I suppose, by this same absurd “logic,” you think that the only way we can protect the right of people to use knives for cooking is by protecting the right of murderers to use knives for murder, uh?
As I explain in my linked articles, there is a difference between saying that people do not have a RIGHT to display these “Women are property” signs, versus saying that we ought to use force to prevent them from displaying those signs. Depending on the circumstances, it may or may not be wise to use force to prevent people from doing something that they have no right to do. Sometimes using force would likely backfire by creating greater public support for the pro-oppression message rather than less support for it. In this case it would make more sense to respond by refuting the pro-oppression message to persuade people it was wrong.
But in the case of the “Women are property” signs, using force to prevent people from displaying them would NOT result in more people agreeing with them. It would, however, help prevent the few who DO agree with them from connecting with and mobilizing other like-minded pro-oppression people to organize as an oppressive force.
YES to freedom of ANTI-oppression speech!
NO to freedom of PRO-oppression speech!
The ruling billionaire plutocracy wants us to defend the so-called “right” of free speech for pro-oppression speech. Let’s not fall for that trap.
Thank goodness we have you to be you cigilant of the manifold ploys used by the elites to control the narrative.