"Proponents of free speech sometimes face a similar paradox: we must defend speech that calls on us to suppress 'unpopular' views. Some are concerned that if you protect people’s right to voice their support for censorship, you are thereby undermining free speech and sowing the seeds of its own undoing."
"Some are concerned . . ." is a common preface to a straw-man argument. Is this piece a rebuttal to individuals or organizations who are actually advocating censoring those who support censorship or is it an abstract think piece? If the former, wouldn't it have been appropriate to identify them in a way that would assure a reader of their existence? If this is a thought piece, why resort to the "some people are saying" device?
"Proponents of free speech sometimes face a similar paradox: we must defend speech that calls on us to suppress 'unpopular' views. Some are concerned that if you protect people’s right to voice their support for censorship, you are thereby undermining free speech and sowing the seeds of its own undoing."
"Some are concerned . . ." is a common preface to a straw-man argument. Is this piece a rebuttal to individuals or organizations who are actually advocating censoring those who support censorship or is it an abstract think piece? If the former, wouldn't it have been appropriate to identify them in a way that would assure a reader of their existence? If this is a thought piece, why resort to the "some people are saying" device?