I'm not sure what the point of this post is. It says
> And yet at every point in history, there were true things that would get you in terrible trouble to say. Is ours the first where this isn't so? What an amazing coincidence that would be.
and then goes on to argue that saying certain things could get you in trouble. I'm sure that the orthodoxy-aligned people at any point in time believed that they couldn't say anything that would get them in trouble as well.
So it may be an unfortunate dynamic, but the post contradicts itself in presenting it as a product of our time. If anything, things got better: in the past you'd be imprisoned or killed, today people yell at you on Twitter and in the worst case you may have to switch jobs.
> but the post contradicts itself in presenting it as a product of our time.
No. It doesn't. Nope. It presents the phenomenon as something that's always true - recall the discussion of time traveling and meeting the same dynamic with different particulars in each time and place.
Moreover, "the point of this post" is abundantly clear: the more closely your views adhere to the mainstream, the more blind you'll be to the costs of holding opinions outside the mainstream because you don't encounter those costs. It's a good point and not hard to understand.
> And yet at every point in history, there were true things that would get you in terrible trouble to say. Is ours the first where this isn't so? What an amazing coincidence that would be.
and then goes on to argue that saying certain things could get you in trouble. I'm sure that the orthodoxy-aligned people at any point in time believed that they couldn't say anything that would get them in trouble as well.
So it may be an unfortunate dynamic, but the post contradicts itself in presenting it as a product of our time. If anything, things got better: in the past you'd be imprisoned or killed, today people yell at you on Twitter and in the worst case you may have to switch jobs.