I don't have a problem with this rule, I have a problem with the right not applying it just as hard as the left does.
The left controls the institutions, the right is an insurgency. It is asymmetric warfare so you can't use the enemy's tactics against them and expect to get the same results.
Their people murder and loot and burn and nothing happens to them. Our people trespass and get thrown in federal prison to be tortured at the whims of the negro guards.
Their goal is to destroy everything, their tactic is chaos. Our goal is peace and preservation so using chaos is counter-productive towards our goals. We need to focus on building bulwarks against chaos and slowly expanding them, knowing that our generations are already lost, but hoping that what we build will allow our great-great-grandchildren to live at greater peace.
Then it's no rule at all; it's a pure power game. Whoever can shout down their opponents will control the conversation which, inevitably, leads to violence.
The classical liberals understood this, hence: I may not agree with what you say but I'll defend to thr death your right to say it".
If they don't have thr right to speak, violence becomes the language of power.
Violence isn't the language of power. Violence merely is (one primary form of) power. And only those with power, are allowed language.
Violence isn't language, it is what allows language to occur. The threat of violence, "the law and society", is what lets people speak to each-other in a civil manner, or even an uncivil manner.
The left controls the institutions, the right is an insurgency. It is asymmetric warfare so you can't use the enemy's tactics against them and expect to get the same results.
Their people murder and loot and burn and nothing happens to them. Our people trespass and get thrown in federal prison to be tortured at the whims of the negro guards.
Their goal is to destroy everything, their tactic is chaos. Our goal is peace and preservation so using chaos is counter-productive towards our goals. We need to focus on building bulwarks against chaos and slowly expanding them, knowing that our generations are already lost, but hoping that what we build will allow our great-great-grandchildren to live at greater peace.
This is an extraordinarily wise comment. I agree 100%.
Then it's no rule at all; it's a pure power game. Whoever can shout down their opponents will control the conversation which, inevitably, leads to violence.
The classical liberals understood this, hence: I may not agree with what you say but I'll defend to thr death your right to say it".
If they don't have thr right to speak, violence becomes the language of power.
Violence isn't the language of power. Violence merely is (one primary form of) power. And only those with power, are allowed language.
Violence isn't language, it is what allows language to occur. The threat of violence, "the law and society", is what lets people speak to each-other in a civil manner, or even an uncivil manner.
Always has been.
Except conservatives would get arrested and have the book thrown at them so your point is null imo