Words are not violence

TLDR

• DHH argues that equating words with violence is corrosive to civil debate, and calls for doubling down on earnest discourse rather than retreating.

Key Takeaways

• DHH has debated online for 30 years across Usenet, blog comments, Twitter/X, and LinkedIn, mostly on technology and occasionally society.
• The 2021 37signals blowup exposed him to mob-style threats and intimidation, which he says fundamentally changed him.
• Some tech factions label ideological opponents “nazis” or “fascists” then invoke “punch a nazi” rhetoric, which DHH calls deeply sickening and not merely rhetorical.
• His response is the opposite of retreat: keep showing up, hold ideals high, and continue public debate even on hostile territory.
• He cites Charlie Kirk as an example of continuing to engage in live debate not to win everyone, but to reach some with a good argument.

Why It Matters

• The argument is directed at builders and people in tech specifically, not just politics, where violent rhetoric is increasingly used to justify silencing opponents.
• Retreating from public debate cedes ground to those who weaponize mob pressure; continued engagement is framed as a civic, not just personal, obligation.
• The piece draws a direct line from Socratic ideals to modern online discourse, arguing that live exchange with other humans is foundational to civilization.

DHH · 2025-09-11 · Read the original