Wow. Robert Reich is still upset over Elon Musk blocking him for being an annoying troll two years ago. Oh, and he doesn’t really have any idea what free speech means if he thinks Elon blocking him makes him less of a free speech absolutist.
Elon didn’t stop Bob from spewing a bunch of stupid (trust us, he continues to spew endless amounts of dumb), it just kept him from having to listen to it. What many on the Left do is not only block people they disagree with but go out of their way to destroy them so no one else can hear from them either.
You’d think a professor like Bob would know that.
Two years ago, I posted a tweet criticizing Elon Musk for how he treated his Tesla workers, and then he blocked me.
Seems like an odd move for a self-described “free speech absolutist.”https://t.co/ob96QLIxVP
— Robert Reich (@RBReich) April 11, 2022
It’s about power.
HA HA HA HA HA
Does Bob think it’s not about power now with Big Tech and the progressive activists running it? Hey, at least he didn’t threaten to slap Elon like he did Sinema.
You can guess how this went over with people who actually know what free speech means.
Did that stop you from tweeting? Did it stop OTHERS from seeing your tweets? No? Well, there you are. Having free speech means you get to say what you want. It doesn't mean others have to listen to you.
— Ms Construed aka Carolyn (@casteffen315) April 11, 2022
Exactly.
You are absolutely free to babble whatever crazy, genius, silly, obnoxious, funny, sad, horrible, etc. STUFF you want … but there’s no rule or law that says we have to listen to you. Bob missed that point, apparently.
There's a difference between believing in free speech and not wanting to hear the b******* takes that come from you. You have an absolute right to say whatever you want to say, but that does not mean Elon or anyone else is required to listen.
— Joecephus (@_joecephus) April 11, 2022
Bob is on a mission to trash Elon … lol.
Here's @RBReich in the Guardian today warning of the grave dangers of Elon Musk's free speech views. He frames it as billionaire control of the internet.
But that's what we have *now*: tech oligarchs dictating what can and can't be said on the internet:https://t.co/G50aOoXYL5
— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) April 12, 2022
Bob is fine with oligarchs as long as they agree with him.
Here's the thing…You can say what you want, but that does NOT mean that I have to listen to you. We covered that in 2nd grade.
— Russ Dumas-His Awesome Magnificence 🇺🇸 (@RussDumas) April 11, 2022
He didn't prevent you from speaking.
Are you telling me you don't know the difference?
— Brian (@dustopian) April 11, 2022
Free speech doesn't mean forcing people to listen but does mean giving them the option to tune you out.
— Phineas J Whoopee (@j_whoopee) April 11, 2022
That's your argument? He blocked you and hurt your little feelings? And how many have you blocked? How many have you called upon to be censored, silenced because YOU don't like their speech? Blocking is a personal choice, censorship is done for political reasons.
— TheOpinant (@OpinantThe) April 11, 2022
Freedom of speech is not a mandate for others to listen
— Harold the King-Emperor (@HaroldtheCatLOL) April 11, 2022
Perhaps he blocked you for being a pest and an idiot. pic.twitter.com/4pVP7gKBis
— Greg B (@ramsangels) April 11, 2022
1) He didn't eliminate your ability to scream at the top of your lungs into the twittersphere (unlike, say, Donald Trump) 2) He didn't suggest others follow his move 3) You have the right to speak, not be heard
Perhaps he just didn't want to listen to ankle biters whine…
— Robin Green (@rdgreen) April 12, 2022
Ding ding ding.
***
Related:
Join the conversation as a VIP Member