Andy Koppelman responds to my post arguing that his otherwise-convincing philosophical arguments for protecting offensive speech improperly suggest that paradigmatic censorship comes from the left (e.g., college students seeking to avoid hearing racist ideas by silencing racist speakers).
He agrees that the essay (a condensed version of a longer forthcoming law review article) offered a one-way picture. The longer piece includes examples (cut from the condensed version) arguing that “[t]his pathology spans the political spectrum,” offering counter examples of right-wing censorship resting on the same idea–there are “some ideas that students – even college students – are too frail to be exposed to.”
I also appreciate the title of Andy’s new post. Not heard very often.