While it is true that Musk's Tweet isn't entirely unambiguous and there can be difficulties in the position of free speech "absolutism", I see little reason to find Musk's stance nearly as mysterious or complicated as the article supposes. By all indications, Musk intends to regulate free speech no more than is required by the law (to do as little as legally permitted to interfere in free speech).
Musk and Twitter are located in the U.S.A., so it would seem to be a very safe assumption that is his primary point of reference regarding free speech and the relationship between the government, citizenry, and law. Since Musk is mentioning the will of the people, it would also seem to be highly likely he is only willing to abide by legal restrictions on free speech in countries where the will of the people dictates the course of the nation and the nation's laws. Such a view would clearly exclude dictatorships, totalitarian states, and other forms of tyrannical governments that do not value the will or freedom of their people, including free speech.
Musk and Twitter are located in the U.S.A., so it would seem to be a very safe assumption that is his primary point of reference regarding free speech and the relationship between the government, citizenry, and law. Since Musk is mentioning the will of the people, it would also seem to be highly likely he is only willing to abide by legal restrictions on free speech in countries where the will of the people dictates the course of the nation and the nation's laws. Such a view would clearly exclude dictatorships, totalitarian states, and other forms of tyrannical governments that do not value the will or freedom of their people, including free speech.
Upvote
-35
(0
/
-35)