SciFi Author James Krake

There are currently three factions in what was the free speech coalition 1) Purists: They believe free speech is more important than any other consideration 2) Partisans: They believe in free speech for me, but not for thee. It’s OK when we do it, but not when you do it. 3) Game Theoreticians: Free speech as a stable equilibrium…advocate for "tit-for-tat" reciprocity to deter abuses, recognizing that without symmetric consequences, the powerful will always suppress the powerless, eroding norms for all The Game Theoretician isn't a fencesitter; they're a strategist playing the long game. They champion free speech as the optimal Nash equilibrium in a polarized democracy, where everyone benefits from open discourse, but they know ideals alone don't enforce it Once the norms have been broken, history shows that without credible threats of retaliation, the dominant side will always tilt the board: think the left's deplatforming waves post-2016 (e.g. Alex Jones' bans) or the right's current pushback after Charlie Kirk's assassination last week, like calls for Kimmel’s suspension The key insight? Asymmetry breeds abuse. If the right now abstains from "taste of their own medicine" tactics (boycotts, firings, or regulatory nudges) the left learns zero cost for future censorship when they regain power Enter deterrence: a calibrated tit-for-tat, where violations trigger proportional responses. This isn't vengeance; it's vaccination. It forces empathy through experience, making both sides internalize that free speech should be sacrosanct And so it is possible to still be on the side of free speech, while also using this opportunity to call out the hypocrisy of the left because they are the ones who broke the system In other words: I want free speech for all, but I also don’t wanna be a sucker and have to face censorship again when the left comes into power. Therefore, I’m going to take this moment in time to criticize the left and call out their hypocrisy, while taking my time in coming around to criticizing the right for doing the same because I’m approaching this problem in terms of game theory and while I share the purist’s objective, I think this is a better way to achieve it. Because shaming the left or appealing to morality or principles sure didn’t work one bit!