Rachel Stewart on free speech

Rachel Stewart writes:

The biggest cultural shift this year is around free speech and tribalism. The never-ending stories about the no-platforming of speakers has been quite something to watch.
Universities – those last bastions of ideas and intellectual rigour – have swallowed the rat poison of the easily triggered and led the way in anti-democratic moves to “protect” their students from “emotional harm”.
Who gets to decide hate speech versus alternative views? Isn’t it just another version of authoritarianism for the purposes of limiting free speech? Are we now so fragile that even hearing mere words can send us into a tailspin?
My view? It’s far more dangerous to suppress free speech than it is to hear what people are thinking – unpalatable as it may, or may not, be. That place of censorship is where festering political movements are born. I prefer to know roughly what’s coming down the pipe.
Tribalism and intersectionality are the new black. Following the herd appears to be de rigueur once again but, to my eye, it’s just another form of hell. It usually goes from healthy to unhealthy in times of societal breakdown. It’s the human default position when we’re feeling threatened.
By God, it’s boring, annoying and ultimately stupid. Why? Because you don’t have to think too much. Plus, there’s the added bonus of feeling so sure of your position you can be as hateful as possible to anyone who dares to think outside the prescribed mob box.

A great summary of the threat posed by the “offence brigade”