People like to throw this term around a lot when talking about freedom of speech. I am not sure that they have actually thought about it a lot or have ACTUALLY observed it in action.
The concept is a core part of Classical Liberalism (which USED to encompass both major American political parties, but not so much these days)—the justification for things like the 1st Amendment here in the United States.
The conceit (if you will) that governance was rational. That the People were rational and would choose good ideas in this sort of shopping mall where they could compare and contrast and pick the truth from the lies and the good from the bad.
Apparently, a lot of people did not get the memo.
There are a lot of complaints about what we call (these days) cancel culture In it's essence, this usually refers to private individuals or groups or institutions acting against people putting forward ideas they do not like. Not allowing those ideas to be expressed in forums they control, (and which are, frankly, usually their property).
It usually isn’t the government doing that… because they are laws against that in most cases and legal redress is available.
But those laws do not apply to private individuals (and corporations are people, too, so says the US Supreme Court), except in limited cases and senses.
In reality, isn’t canceling bad ideas sort of the goal of the marketplace of ideas? Isn’t that what it is ultimately intended to do, get rid of the “bad” ideas?
Of course, the usual counterargument to that is that the elimination of bad ideas is supposed to be a result of this rational comparison and decision making process. not through various forms of coercion.
Looking back at history, in general, and American politics in particular, I get a real laugh out of that one.
Let’s be real… how many “bad” ideas have you actually seen die, never to return? I think that number is somewhere around zero. Bad ideas keep coming back, if they ever go away in the first place.
Upon examination, success in the marketplace of ideas is seemingly based upon two things: how popular an idea is and how much force is brought to bear in support of that idea… and these things are, in a sense, a function of each other.
Neither of these mechanisms has much to do with the quality of the idea—of how true or correct or accurate or useful it is.
Some food for thought, we’ll come back to this.