Elon Musk doesn’t understand the paradox of tolerance, which is frustrating and dangerous. This week, Musk announced his intention to cease Twitter’s* operation in Brazil, after Brazilian Judge Alexandre de Moraes ordered the platform to block certain accounts as part of an investigation into “digital militias” accused of disseminating fake news and hate messages during the administration of former President Jair Bolsonaro. Musk called the decision “unconstitutional" and a violation of free speech.
Elon Musk doesn’t understand what “free speech” means.
In 1945, philosopher Karl Popper considered if a tolerant society should tolerate the intolerant:
Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them.
In other words, if a demand for unlimited tolerance suggests that we need to tolerate the most awful ideas and acts that occur within society (specifically, those that oppress others), we’re providing a tacit endorsement of those policies.
In even simpler terms, freedom of speech doesn’t mean you can shout “fire” in a crowded theater, and you can’t post willfully misleading or hateful stuff online. That’s not “censorship,” Elon. That’s good practice.
Years ago I worked as copy editor for a museum with an active blog. One of the writers was thoughtful, well-informed, and absolutely atrocious with spelling and grammar. I had to clean up his posts prior to publication, and he’d always rant and rave that I was “censoring” him. I’d explain that the meaning of his words was unchanged, and that it was my job as editor to advocate for the reader. To clean up his errors. But he wouldn’t hear it. To him, I was the enemy who was censoring his voice.
It frustrated me as copy editing is not censorship, just as refusing to provide a public platform to hateful propagandists with an agenda of intolerance is not a violation of free speech.
*I don’t use deadnames out of respect, but I’m always happy to say “Twitter."