¹û¶³´«Ã½app¹Ù·½

Is the free speech conversation too simplistic?

Peter Ives thinks so. He is the author of "," a new book that seeks to provide a more nuanced analysis of the free speech debate within various domains, from government to campus to social media.

Ives is a professor of political science at the University of Winnipeg. He researches and writes on the politics of "global English," bridging the disciplines of language policy, political theory, and the influential ideas of Antonio Gramsci.

Enjoying our podcast? Donate to FIREtoday and get exclusive content like member webinars, special episodes, and more. If you became a FIRE Member through a donation to FIREat and would like access to Substack's paid subscriber podcast feed, please email sotospeak@thefire.org.

Read the transcript.

Timestamps:

00:00 Intro

02:25 The Harper's Letter

05:18 Neil Young vs. Joe Rogan

08:15 Free speech culture

09:53 John Stuart Mill

12:53 Alexander Meiklejohn

17:05 Ives's critique of Jacob Mchangama's "History of Free Speech" book

17:53 Ives's definition of free speech

19:38 First Amendment vs. Canadian Charter of Rights

21:25 Hate speech

25:22 Canadian Charter and Canadian universities

34:19 White supremacy and hate speech

40:14 Speech-action distinction

46:04 Free speech absolutism

48:49 Marketplace of ideas

01:05:40 Solutions for better public discourse

01:13:02 Outro

Show notes:

• (1982)

• "" Harper's Magazine (2020)

• "" John Stuart Mill (1859)

• "" Jacob Mchangama (2022)

• Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969)

• (2021)

• (1985)

• (2024)

• (1990)

• "" The New York Times (2017)

• Section 230 (Communications Decency Act of 1996)