The non-aggression principle (NAP) states that the only legitimate violence is self-defence. This includes both physical and psychological aggression.
In the past the principle of freedom of speech did protect all speech, including offensive speech. Nowadays we see this principle being more and more softened to the point where only pc speech is thought to be legitimate speech. We still have the rights to offend anyone we like, but this might end in a couple of years.
What does the NAP say about political correctness and trigger culture. Is saying something that is offensive to some groups violating the NAP and should be considered to be immoral? I would argue otherwise.
The NAP protects the most fundamental rights of humans, the exclusive ownership over our bodies and the ownership of our work. Violence is opposed to these rights since it is used to dominate and control others. And for this it does not matter if the violence is physical or psychological. But most bad speech is not used to control others and does not fall under the NAP.
Let me give two examples.
- I am in the pub with my friends and tell a sexist joke. We all laugh and at the next table there are some women that are offended. In this situation there was no violence. I have a right to offend others and others have a right to be offended. It may mean that I am an asshole, but I am not violating the NAP
- I am the boss in a company and psychologically mistreating an employee. Here I try to establish dominance over the person and psychological aggression is not really different from using physical violence or threats. This case violates the NAP.
In summary, in my opinion the NAP also applies to psychological violence. But that does not mean that we have a duty to conform to pc culture. We have a right to be offensive, we have a right to be an asshole, other people have a right to feel offended. Psychological violence is not a collection of stupid jokes, it is when people try to mentally destroy others with the plan to establish dominance and control.
I wish this were so cut and dried.
You cannot speak well enough to not offend someone. Just putting your thoughts into words is enough for people to be offended.
So, limiting your speech because of "offensive" is an act of aggression.
However, if someone has said your language is offensive, and you continue to offend, that is aggression.
Now it comes down to situation.
If the offended person leaves, and you follow shouting more offences, than you are clearly being aggressive.
If you are in a crowded party, and someone not in your group is offended, and loudly proclaims such and demands you stop, they are being aggressive.
What a pain.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
they say that words hurt more than blows, blows sound but offensive spalabras remain forever. I hate violence.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Congratulations! This post has been upvoted from the communal account, @minnowsupport, by frdem3dot0 from the Minnow Support Project. It's a witness project run by aggroed, ausbitbank, teamsteem, theprophet0, someguy123, neoxian, followbtcnews, and netuoso. The goal is to help Steemit grow by supporting Minnows. Please find us at the Peace, Abundance, and Liberty Network (PALnet) Discord Channel. It's a completely public and open space to all members of the Steemit community who voluntarily choose to be there.
If you would like to delegate to the Minnow Support Project you can do so by clicking on the following links: 50SP, 100SP, 250SP, 500SP, 1000SP, 5000SP.
Be sure to leave at least 50SP undelegated on your account.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit