Most people think they understand the meaning of free speech but recent events show that many don’t. People have the right to say hateful things. Words on their own are not violence. The test of incitement to violence is its immediacy. Congress should not expand the definition of anti-Semitism. And freedom of speech doesn’t include the freedom to occupy buildings, block free movement, or camp illegally.

You’re Only For Free Speech If You Defend It For People You Hate

We should protect people physically, not emotionally

by @galexybrane & @shellenberger
A Israel supporter (left) shouts slogans against Pro-Palestinian demonstrators as they hold a protests outside Columbia University on February 2, 2024 in New York City. A pro-Palestinian demonstrator (right) shouts slogans as he marches on January 15, 2024 in New York City. (Photo by Eduardo MunozAlvarez/VIEWpress) (Photo by Eduardo Munoz Alvarez/VIEWpress)

Pro-Palestine protests on college campuses around the country have inflamed debates about free speech and antisemitism. Some Republicans and Democrats claim that government oversight and censorship of hate speech is needed to address these protests. Representatives Richie Torres (D-NY) and Mike Lawler (R-NY), for example, have introduced the COLUMBIA Act, which will create “antisemitism monitors” at select universities.

Texas Governor Greg Abbott, who in 2019 signed a bill to guarantee freedom of speech in Texas universities, suggested that protesters should be arrested for their views. “These protesters belong in jail,” he wrote about students at the University of Texas Austin. “Antisemitism will not be tolerated in Texas. Period.”

And most recently, the House Rules Committee advanced the Antisemitism Awareness Act of 2023, a bipartisan bill to expand the definition of antisemitism in Title VI federal anti-discrimination law. The bill refers to the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s definition of antisemitism, which includes criticism of Israel, such as characterizing the state of Israel as a racist endeavor, or applying double standards to Israel’s conduct. Because all schools that receive federal funds must comply with Title VI, the bill would lead to greater censorship of speech on campus.

All of these efforts are violations of freedom of speech and we condemn them unreservedly. It’s once again time to remind ourselves and our fellow citizens that the test of our commitment to free speech is when we demand its protection for our enemies and for speech we hate, not for our friends and for speech we like.

To be sure, there have been hateful incidents at protests. Outside Columbia University’s gates, for instance, pro-Palestine protesters shouted “Go back to Poland!” at demonstrators holding Israeli flags. Multiple incidents of harassment have been reported on both sides. A leader of Columbia’s protest said on a livestream in January that Zionists “don’t deserve to live,” adding, “I feel very comfortable, very comfortable, calling for these people to die.”

Columbia students also pushed pro-Israel Jewish students out of their Gaza solidarity encampment on the campus lawn. In a similar incident, pro-Palestine protesters prevented a pro-Israel Jewish student at UCLA from accessing his route to class.

In these instances and others, protesters infringed on the rights of fellow tuition-paying students. University rules place limits on the time, place, and manner of protests. Constructing encampments, blocking parts of campus, and occupying buildings are clear violations of these rules and are not forms of protected speech.

Yet the conduct of some young protesters in no way requires placing greater restrictions on political speech for all students and infringing on academic freedom. Nor does it justify more government interventions to combat hate speech, expansion of counterproductive campus “safetyism,” and excessive use of police force on college campuses.

We know that readers may be displeased and disappointed that we are not unequivocally supporting one side of the Israel-Palestine debate and are instead presenting criticisms of both overreaching pro-Israel politicians and radical pro-Palestine protesters. But our position is unchanged from what it was last year: we reject the far left’s ideological extremism and its endorsement of Hamas’ actions on October 7. At the same time, we share the left’s concerns about civilian deaths in Gaza, violations of the Geneva Conventions, Israel’s political leadership, and potential escalation to a wider conflict.

We believe there is currently a great deal of confusion and hypocrisy around free speech on both sides of this debate. Some on the right who once claimed to believe in absolute free speech are now calling for a crackdown on “hate speech.” Meanwhile, many on the left, who have endorsed “cancel culture” and basically all censorship of their opponents since 2016, are now crying “Free speech!” without recognizing or admitting to how their own activities have set a terrible precedent.

Yet the line between speech and unlawful conduct is quite clear. Blocking traffic, taking over buildings, and constructing encampments are acts of force, and are not protected by the First Amendment. A central purpose of civil disobedience historically has been to provoke arrest in order to bring awareness to a cause, and students should know that arrest is a possible outcome of civil disobedience. While we believe that universities must aim to protect the right to protest as much as possible, encampments can disrupt learning and free movement around campus, and it is at universities’ discretion to suspend and expel students or call police to clear encampments.

The line between political speech and harassment or incitement to violence is also almost always clear...

Please subscribe now to support our defense of freedom of speech for all, and to read the rest of the article!

https://x.com/shellenberger/status/1785708261917987004

O Procurador-Geral do Brasil acaba de me acusar de um "provável" crime por publicar "Twitter Files - Brasil". É uma mentira monstruosa. Presidente @LulaOficial está me perseguindo porque expus a censura ilegal do governo. Vou lutar e vencer.

gov.br/agu/pt-br/comu…

O governo do @LulaOficial está espalhando desinformação e teorias conspiratórias ridículas e fáceis de desmascarar, como eu fiz aqui:

https://x.com/shellenberger/status/1781739188955783410

Este documento é uma vergonha nacional.

Este documento revela Lula como igual a Castro.

Brazil's Attorney General just accused me of a "probable" crime for publishing "Twitter Files - Brazil." It's a monstrous lie. President @LulaOficial is persecuting me because I exposed the government's illegal censorship. I will fight back, and win.

gov.br/agu/pt-br/comu…

The @LulaOficial is spreading disinformation and ridiculous conspiracy theories that are easy to debunk, as I did here.

https://x.com/shellenberger/status/1781733287070937253

This document is a national embarrassment.

This document exposes Lula as Castro's equal.

Brazilian Judge Pushes Nationalist Conspiracy Theory To Weaponize Federal Police Against Defenders Of Free Speech

Brazil’s Federal Police discuss me in new report commissioned by Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes

Yesterday, a Brazilian Supreme Court Justice, who is also the President of the Superior Electoral Commission, lashed out angrily at X owner Elon Musk. At an event heavily promoted by Globo News, Alexandre de Moraes claimed that Musk is part of a vast extremist conspiracy to undermine Brazil’s sovereignty and democracy. He claimed that Musk was an “irresponsible mercantilist” motivated solely by profits who had “united” with “extremist Brazilian politicians.”

But there is no evidence of any conspiracy. Musk did not know I would publish the Twitter Files Brazil. Nor did the Brazilian politicians who reacted to them. And many of the politicians and journalists who de Moraes is demonizing as “extremist” are advocates of freedom of speech, including the right to criticize de Moraes.

It’s true that some of the people who de Moraes is censoring have urged a military intervention and have made unsubstantiated claims about elections and Covid. I do not agree with many of the statements made by the people whom de Moraes has censored.

But freedom of speech means nothing if it does not protect people and ideas you disagree with. If we aren’t going to allow people to criticize democracy, elections, and vaccines, how will we ever know if they are bad? If people are spreading false information about democracy, elections, and vaccines, the best way to deal with the false information is with accurate information, not censorship.

The real extremist spreading disinformation here is de Moraes. If Musk were solely motivated by money, then he would not have stood up to de Moraes, which resulted in the Brazilian government halting all advertising on X, the resignation of X’s top lawyer in Brazil, who feared for his safety, and may result in de Moraes shutting down X in Brazil.

He is not simply demanding that social media platforms censor specific content by controversial journalists and politicians. He is demanding that all social media platforms ban them for life. He often does so through secret hearings without the right of appeal.

In fact, it’s all much worse than that. You can’t be a politician or journalist if you can’t communicate on social media. And so de Moraes is not just violating the Brazilian constitution’s protections of free speech, he is also attacking the freedom of the press, destroying careers, and interfering in elections.

De Moraes has acted unilaterally to invent entirely new laws. He is thus interfering and taking over the role of Congress and of the president. That means he is behaving like a dictator.

And now de Moraes has weaponized the Federal Police, including against me, for publishing the Twitter Files in Brazil. The Federal Police delivered two reports to de Moraes, one on April 18 and the other on April 19. The reports consist of a gigantic conspiracy theory, suggesting connections and relationships that simply do not exist.

The reports single me out and suggest it is somehow suspicious that I only have paid for one subscription on X, which is to Elon Musk. But there is nothing suspicious about this. I am paying Musk, not the other way around. And, as the Police report notes, Musk takes a percentage of the revenue of the people who subscribe to my content on X.

And the reports claim that people who de Moraes had demanded be censored had gained limited access to communicate on X, in particular through X’s Spaces, which allows for live conversation.

In other words, de Moraes is totally obsessed with silencing his enemies. It’s not enough for X to have blocked profiles. He also doesn’t want them to be able to use their voice.

It helps that the Brazilian government directly pays the Brazilian news media. The new Lula government increased government funding by 60% for Globo alone. Globo is the biggest media in Brazil. It has been demanding more censorship and running propaganda for de Moraes.

De Moraes is a brutish authoritarian. His censorship is as bad as the censorship imposed by Brazil’s military dictators. He is seeking, as a judge, to eliminate particularly politicians and journalists from public life.

This is hardly the first time de Moraes has weaponized the Federal Police. And in calling Elon Musk a foreign mercantilist, de Moraes is using the exact same kind of nationalist rhetoric that he has attacked his enemies for using.

Why does Moraes have so much power? In Brazil, people told me it was because de Moraes controls so many court cases involving rich and powerful people, including politicians and other judges.

The solution is for Brazil’s Congress to open an investigation, known as a Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry (CPI). A CPI can evaluate judicial abuses of power, and that is obviously what is happening here. Under a CPI, Brazil’s Congress could gain access to communications between police and judges or anyone else.

A CPI could also hear from the victims of censorship. It could bring light to thousands of cases under secrecy. And it could discover how social media platforms were compelled to obey or collaborate with the regime.

Musk has taken extraordinary and historic actions to protect free speech. So, too has the US Congress. Now it’s time for Brazil’s Congress to act against the anti-democratic extremism of de Moraes. It must do so before the extremist de Moraes starts arresting his political enemies and shuts down X, and thus free speech, in Brazil.

Aqui está a mesma coisa em português para todos os brasileiros que amam a liberdade e odeiam a tirania

https://x.com/shellenberger/status/1781739188955783410

Here are the pages from the creepy Federal Police report, which pushes a bonkers conspiracy theory... My favorite part is the screenshot of my profile page, which includes the banner, "Defund the Thought Police." Oh the irony! 😂

Brazil’s high court demanded that Twitter censor, under threat of penalty of nearly US$20,000/day, a state legislator who shared ACCURATE and PUBLIC information.

This is just one case among dozens or hundreds of ILLEGAL and UNCONSTITUTIONAL censorship demanded of politicians & journalists.

The Brazilian high court and electoral court began by demanding censorship of specific content and then segued into demanding that people — including elected leaders — be entirely BANNED from all social media.

This is madness and psychopathology institutionalized at the highest level of government.

The court demanded that a state lawmaker be BANNED for posting this publicly available event announcement.

And, at first, the charges against him were kept secret!

https://twitter.com/david_agape_/status/1780781941047922856

This is outrageous totalitarianism and must be condemned by all Western political leaders, no matter where you sit on the political spectrum.

Police officers in Brussels shut down a conservative political gathering while former UK politician @Nigel_Farage was on stage.

This is the kind of thuggish gangsterism that we rightly associate with Nazism and Communism.

Shame on the police and mayor of Brussels for this totalitarian tactic!

"The police document," reports The Telegraph, "suggested speeches by speakers including Nigel Farage and Suella Braverman could lead to public disorder or display racist and homophobic views."

Apparently, the police have, for now, allowed the conference to go on.

But they have blocked any new people from entering.

This goes far beyond "cancel culture."

This is the mayor of Brussels, the seat of the European Union's government, preventing conservatives from their Constitutionally protected right to free speech.

The leaders of the Western world have lost their minds.

Here is the dictator-thug responsible for this outrageous violation of freedom at the heart of Europe's supposedly liberal democracy.

Shame on you @emir_kir ! You are no better than the Nazis and Communists who repressed their political enemies!

https://x.com/emir_kir/status/1780177823602180390