421–430 of 823 posts
It's amazing to me that people don't see the irony that a major tactic of the nazis was quelling free speech. We are so scared of the nazis that we act like them. This is of course how they framed it too. They would have claimed they needed to protect themselves from the dangerous ideas, literature, art of the Jews.
No amount of good patrons in those bars makes the bad patrons tolerable.
There will always be shitholes dominated by meth-cookers and Nazi bikers. But most bars choose to be enjoyable places.
Social media are privately run spaces. The lowest level of discourse sets the tone. Clean it up.
I’ve spent 20 minutes scanning the discussion, and didn’t see anybody saying “there are both pros and cons here, but on balance, I think this is mostly-[good/bad]” - only 100% one way or the other :( (Feel free to correct me if there’s a ton of posts like this that I somehow missed)
How can we be so sure we know what’s best for a platform of billions, when we can’t even stop our own community of thousands from being so polarised? D:
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have they? Because I still regularly encounter educated people who can't tell the difference between free speech and threats, harassment, etc. If you can't distinguish between free speech and coercive speech, then you don't understand the free-speech position that you purport to oppose ("He who knows only his own argument knows little of that"). I recall a thread on cancel culture a few months ago where virtually eve…
I'll be honest I don't understand your usage of the term "free speech" here. The way I define that term is that it's a political concept expressing the desire for people to be allowed to express themselves however they want to the largest extent possible/ethical. An example of law embodying free speech would be the 1st amendment of the US Constitution. Based on context, I think you are using free speech to mean "spee…
To distinguish between this definition and the first-amendment definition, I usually refer to this as "free speech ideals".
To save free speech, we have to destroy free speech. In the future, some historian is going to write the seminal work on the decline and dissolution of the United States - and there's going to be an entire chapter dedicated to social media.
You will find that Holocaust denying specifically has been banned by law from a number of European countries for a very long time. And free speech is still doing just fine.
This might not be the slippery slope you believe it is.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a typical slight of hand in these discussions. We are talking about deeply intolerant, bad faith actors, and you substitute this with "censoring opinions outside the mainstream". This is deeply dishonest by you. We are not talking about removing peoples right to use a platform because they are out of the mainstream and we disagree with them. That is NOT the reason. There is plenty of non-mainstream opinion ar…
I don't think the person you're replying to is being dishonest. You've simply listed reasons as to why this content isn't acceptable. Of course there are often reasons why content and beliefs might be rejected by mainstream thought -- "it's a pack of lies" is chief among them. There's a definition problem here. We could use "no one is talking about removing the content" as a rubric to determine whether content is tru…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not using abstraction, I'm using the literal meaning of the word. Intolerance is not allowing something, usually that you disagree with. Censorship = Intolerance. Further, I don't think not believing in something, nor expressing that disbelief thereof qualifies as "intolerance" by any definition. What specifically is not being tolerated?
Then you are not arguing that OP missed the point of the Paradox of Intolerance. You are arguing that Holocaust denialism is not intolerance. How many people publicly deny the Holocaust but are otherwise tolerant of Jews, homosexuals, etc.? I'm really curious what you think that Venn diagram looks like.
Banning views that may be associated with otherwise intolerant people but aren't themselves intolerant is just a road to hell. It's literally stereotyping.
You could draw a lot of very hateful venn diagrams against most major religions. That shouldn't stop people from expressing their faith because you can draw a line.
I don't think that's the best approach. I like it better how it can be done at e.g. reddit: make other groups able to link to the content/discussion and show this link to the reader of the original content. Then the reader gets to notice that the topic is controversial and discussed in other places and can make up their own idea based on different views. It shouldn't be difficult to convince a naive reader of conspir…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This heavy-handedness isn't an encroachment on free speech but a necessary impediment to keep the spirit of free speech and free society intact, one where the tolerant voices aren't drained out by the relentlessness and irrationality of the intolerant. What is tolerance? You can't tolerate something if you agree with it. Tolerance means putting up with things with which you disagree. This is an encroachment on free…
This is a typical slight of hand in these discussions. We are talking about deeply intolerant, bad faith actors, and you substitute this with "censoring opinions outside the mainstream". This is deeply dishonest by you. We are not talking about removing peoples right to use a platform because they are out of the mainstream and we disagree with them. That is NOT the reason. There is plenty of non-mainstream opinion ar…
NO U.
That aught to be enough for the argument to be closed, but since we like to pretend we're better than that: how can you tell that someone holds bad faith views? I do not have a machine to peer into the soul of man, neither do you. People can believe horrible things and think themselves good people, just wait 30 years and you will be one of them. That your views happen to be ascendant doesn't mean we should ban everyone who isn't.