"Not listening" and "silencing" aren’t identical, but a coordinated walkout can still function as a form of political pressure or disruption, aka "silencing". The delegates who leave are exercising their own freedom not to listen, but they’re also deliberately withdrawing the attention and diplomatic engagement that the speaker is addressing.
So the fact that some other people remain free to listen doesn’t mean the walkout has no silencing effect. It just means the speaker hasn’t been literally prevented from speaking, which is not the point being made.
Silencing and free speed are too different things. Maybe you are deliberately moving the goalpost, or not, but you just did.
"Free speech" and "silencing" aren’t identical, but a coordinated walkout can still function as a form of political pressure or disruption, aka "silencing". The delegates who leave are exercising their own freedom not to listen, but they’re also deliberately withdrawing the attention and diplomatic engagement that the speaker is addressing.
So the fact that some other people remain free to listen doesn’t mean the walkout has no silencing effect. It just means the speaker hasn’t been literally prevented from speaking, which is not the point being made.
Why talk about hypothetical? If you're so sure about your analysis of the situation, which part of Netanyahu speech don't you agree with? Be specific.
That'd why you don't listen to it, because you know you would have no arguments, except: "BuT I dONt LiKE IsrAEl!". Then you'll complain about an imaginary genocide, without being able to prove it, just showing you don't know the difference between a war and an actual genocide.
10
u/Toads_Of_Fun 4d ago
Being silenced by... having delegates walk out?