" In his Second Treatise of Government, John Locke writes “no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions.†In this book Locke so perfectly describes the role that government should take in its citizenries lives and this quote is often simplified to mean the government should protect three basic natural rights: life, liberty, and property.
John Locke wrote these everso impeccable words long before the Declaration of Independence was signed and the Constitution was ratified, but it is foolish to suggest that the founders of the United States of America did not implant John Locke’s philosophy into these documents. The founders were deeply inspired by the ideas of philosophers such as Locke, Montesquieu, …show more content…
Locke and the founding fathers may never have anticipated the existence of social media or the internet, but it seems palpable that their philosophy on the issue …show more content…
While Twitter, as a private company has every right to do this, censorship is in no way productive. I disagree with many of the ideas that Yiannopoulos advocates and I condemn much of the rhetoric he engages in, but Americans must learn to deal with cognitive dissonance and realize the value of free speech, even when it is speech one does not like. If the government had played a role in banning Yiannopoulos, the backlash would have rightly been amplified. If the government, local or federal, placed regulations on social media platforms they would be violating the businesses as well as the citizens rights. Another important document from a set of founding fathers is the Federalist Papers. In Federalist Paper No. 10, James Madison writes, “Liberty is to faction what air is to fire, an aliment without which it instantly expires.†Faction is a dissenting opinion among a minority of people and this quote applies to internet regulation because it suggest that even if the opinion, idea, or content on the internet platform is unpopular, the government would be denying the users natural right to liberty if they were to regulate that
John Locke wrote these everso impeccable words long before the Declaration of Independence was signed and the Constitution was ratified, but it is foolish to suggest that the founders of the United States of America did not implant John Locke’s philosophy into these documents. The founders were deeply inspired by the ideas of philosophers such as Locke, Montesquieu, …show more content…
Locke and the founding fathers may never have anticipated the existence of social media or the internet, but it seems palpable that their philosophy on the issue …show more content…
While Twitter, as a private company has every right to do this, censorship is in no way productive. I disagree with many of the ideas that Yiannopoulos advocates and I condemn much of the rhetoric he engages in, but Americans must learn to deal with cognitive dissonance and realize the value of free speech, even when it is speech one does not like. If the government had played a role in banning Yiannopoulos, the backlash would have rightly been amplified. If the government, local or federal, placed regulations on social media platforms they would be violating the businesses as well as the citizens rights. Another important document from a set of founding fathers is the Federalist Papers. In Federalist Paper No. 10, James Madison writes, “Liberty is to faction what air is to fire, an aliment without which it instantly expires.†Faction is a dissenting opinion among a minority of people and this quote applies to internet regulation because it suggest that even if the opinion, idea, or content on the internet platform is unpopular, the government would be denying the users natural right to liberty if they were to regulate that