Criticizing Ukraine Is Free Speech, Too
This is an edition of Up for Debate, a newsletter by Conor Friedersdorf. On Wednesdays, he rounds up timely conversations and solicits reader responses to one thought-provoking question. Every Friday, he publishes some thoughtful replies. Sign up for the newsletter here.
Question of the Week
What is a valuable insight, lesson, or perspective you have learned from someone who doesn’t share your politics?
Email your thoughts to conor@theatlantic.com. I’ll publish a selection of correspondence in Friday’s newsletter.
Conversations of Note
Debate is especially important during wartime, when the stakes of many judgments are higher, solidarity is more likely to be valued, and groupthink can cloud the judgment of whole nations.
Unfortunately, the free-speech protections and culture that help safeguard our ability to debate here in America are never as threatened as they are during wars: It is historically commonplace in wartime for state officials and regular citizens alike to call for the criminalizing of dissent. Indeed, the ACLU was founded in 1920 amid the free speech crackdowns of World War I, when its founders “driven by the need to protect the constitutional rights of conscientious objectors and anti-war protesters.” The lessons of U.S. history are still lost on some Americans, judging by recent calls for authoritarian crackdowns on speech related to the war in Ukraine, including remarks from former Democratic Representative Tulsi Gabbard, who is accused of spreading false Russian propaganda for expressing concern about “U.S. funded biolabs” in Ukraine and her worry that pathogens therein could escape as a consequence of fighting in the country.
You’re reading a preview, subscribe to read more.
Start your free 30 days