That doesn’t make sense. If someone at a Nazi rally shouted “actually Jews are alright” and got arrested for it, would you say that’s compatible with free speech? Because while they might have experienced consequences, “free speech doesn’t mean freedom from consequences”, so since they were able to say what they intended to they had free speech?
Nowhere in any writings about free speech does it mention that you are free from consequences.
Edit: american free spech has limits, it really only protects you when criticizing the government. As with most governments that enshrined free speech.
That doesn’t make sense. If someone at a Nazi rally shouted “actually Jews are alright” and got arrested for it, would you say that’s compatible with free speech? Because while they might have experienced consequences, “free speech doesn’t mean freedom from consequences”, so since they were able to say what they intended to they had free speech?
Why does he get arrested for shouting “actually, jews are alright”?
I should have been more clear that I’m not talking about a nazi rally in any arbitrary context, but specifically one in nazi germany.
Where they specifically didn’t have free speech.
Indeed, since freely speaking had consequences.
Nowhere in any writings about free speech does it mention that you are free from consequences.
Edit: american free spech has limits, it really only protects you when criticizing the government. As with most governments that enshrined free speech.
Also thats a hell of a whataboutism.
“Free speech only when talking about the government” is very different from “free speech”.
Yeah, and people point to that when they talk about free speech and miss the point where they never said you are completely free of consequences.
Try again. Seriously, you sound like a high school student who clued in half way through the class.
Who are “they”?