- “What You Can’t Say” by Paul Graham (2004.01) – http://paulgraham.com/say.html
- “Re: What You Can’t Say” – http://paulgraham.com/resay.html
- “The Motion Picture Production Code of 1930 (Hays Code)” (in Reformation of the Arts and Music) – http://www.artsreformation.com/a001/hays-code.html
- “What You Can’t Say Will Hurt You” By Geoffrey R. Stone (NYT; 2005.08.15) – http://www.archub.org/stone.txt
- “A Civic Duty to Annoy” by Wendy Kaminer (1997.09) – http://www.archub.org/civicduty.txt
- “Stanley Milgram: The Perils of Obedience” (at Paul Graham’s web site) – http://paulgraham.com/perils.html
- “Mark Twain: Corn-pone Opinions” (at Paul Graham’s web site) – http://paulgraham.com/cornpone.html
- “A New Blacklist for “Excuse Makers” ” (FAIR; 2005.07.27) – http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2598
- New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman has urged the U.S. government to create blacklists of condemned political speech–not only by those who advocate violence, but also by those who believe that U.S. government actions may encourage violent reprisals. The latter group, which Friedman called “just one notch less despicable than the terrorists,” includes a majority of Americans, according to recent polls.
Those who think Iraq War sparks terror are “despicable,” says Friedman
- book “The Ten Things You Can’t Say In America, Revised Edition” by Larry Elder (Amazon) – http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0312284659/
- “Stratagem XXXII” from “The Art Of Controversy” by Arthur Schopenhauer – http://coolhaus.de/art-of-controversy/erist32.htm
- If you are confronted with an assertion, there is a short way of getting rid of it, or, at any rate, of throwing suspicion on it, by putting it into some odious category; even though the connection is only apparent, or else of a loose character. You can say, for instance, “That is Manichaeism” or “It is Arianism,” or “Pelagianism,” or “Idealism,” or “Spinozism,” or “Pantheism,” or “Brownianism,” or “Naturalism,” or “Atheism,” or “Rationalism,” “Spiritualism,” “Mysticism,” and so on. In making an objection of this kind, you take it for granted (1) that the assertion in question is identical with, or is at least contained in, the category cited – that is to say, you cry out, “Oh, I have heard that before”; and (2) that the system referred to has been entirely refuted, and does not contain a word of truth.