This is the Cato Daily Podcast for Thursday, January 5th, 2017.

I'm Caleb Brown.

How have European countries attempted to crack down on disfavored speech?

And could those models of control find their way into the United States.

Fleming Rose is an adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute and recipient of the 2016

Milton Friedman Prize for advancing liberty.

We spoke about why free speech is a better policy

for handling radical ideologies.

If you're a terrorist and you threaten someone and they comply with the action that you want them to take or

under penalty of something, you've become more powerful.

As a terrorist, you have effectively terrorized.

Yes, and you know that's the way terrorism works through fear and all the terrorist threat through fear and intimidation.

And it's what Timfecardinesh a few years ago called the Assassin's Vito or the

jihadist veto in my case. And understand I mean there are there are good reasons to be afraid I mean

people were killed in Paris and and there were I think between five and ten foiled attacks on units posed and where I worked.

The problem is that if you cave in to intimidation and terror and violence,

you will not get less of it, you will get more of it because you show the terrorist that it works.

So why stop?

That's a very good reason to continue that strategy.

In addition, when media outlets and governments make an example of terrorist groups, they typically are in the process of inflating a threat

and making that threat seem larger than it might actually be.

And that's a pretty typical, that's pretty standard story too.

...