Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Was Citizens United Correct? [View all]reACTIONary
(5,770 posts)6. I don't disagree, but how does Citizen's United grant...
... more of a right to free speech to one group over some other group? Some would say it simply prevents one group from being significantly denied the freedom of speech.
I think the correct formulation is Rawls', which might be what you were getting at: That we should all enjoy a fair and equal value's worth of political freedoms, including free speech. The equal worth or fair value of free speech is more problematic than simple free speech and harder to reconcile with the constitution, however. It tends towards judging freedom of speech by the effectiveness of speech. Some speech is ineffective simply because it is unreasonable and incorrect - and that shouldn't be seen as an indication that the speaker is being denied political freedom.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
67 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
"Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state
Fire Walk With Me
Jan 2013
#13
" in an oppressive, authoritarian police state, you don't." No totally, not yet.
Lady Freedom Returns
Jan 2013
#47
You are stuck in semantics and theories while the facts are in your face.
Fire Walk With Me
Jan 2013
#56
Corporations, or any paper entity, are not people. Money is not speech.
Egalitarian Thug
Jan 2013
#21
One last kick to your attention seeking flame bait. "It falls short of an abomination" is only your
Egalitarian Thug
Jan 2013
#28
You are right. "An abomination" might not be all that much of a big deal...
reACTIONary
Jan 2013
#32
OK, it seems you really want to talk, my apologies for assuming that you were just
Egalitarian Thug
Jan 2013
#37
Actually, the ACLU said yes to a very narrow issue and the court ruled very broadly against
Puregonzo1188
Jan 2013
#51