Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is that a problem?
[flagged]
There's a time and a place for these kinds of claims but underneath an article titled "Our nation cannot censor its way back to cultural health" may not be it. ;)
Our nation cannot censor its way back to cultural health
21–30 of 366 posts
Re: Our nation cannot censor its way back to cultural health
#22Re: Our nation cannot censor its way back to cultural health
#23One major distinction this glosses over is the difference between making it so you can't read something (e.g., banning it), and making it so you aren't required to read something (e.g., removing it from the curriculum). Only the former is censorship.
He actually handles that distinction early in the article as a quote: > [...] he noted that there exists not just a right to speak but a right to hear. “To suppress free speech is a double wrong. It violates the rights of the hearer as well as those of the speaker.” But this is of course a gray area. You don't have to listen to anything anyone has to say, but it's also possible to sideline something enough that it is…
I don't see how that quote addresses it. Wouldn't the relevant right be a "right not to hear", which he doesn't mention?
> You don't have to listen to anything anyone has to say
If you're a student, and it's in the state mandated curriculum, then you do.
> it's also possible to sideline something enough that it is effectively censored without being outright forbidden.
I 100% agree with this.
Re: Our nation cannot censor its way back to cultural health
#24I believe in freedom of speech. What I do not believe in is freedom of mass speech. Your responsibility to the truth should increase in line with your reach. Have 1000 followers in twitter and want to talk about starting the next holocaust? Great, say whatever. A million followers? Yeah, that’s a problem. I don’t know how this gets enforced, but we simply cannot give every lunatic a megaphone.
>"I don’t know how this gets enforced, but we simply cannot give every lunatic a megaphone." At least in the US you can't enforce it - and yes, any lunatic can grab a megaphone if they want. The best way to handle problematic speech is more speech, NOT less. Trying to pretend lunatics don't exist is irrational and often a pretext to just block people that others disagree with. Screw that. Safest place for lunatics is…
Well the way things are headed, we’ll be fighting it out in the open IRL soon.
Re: Our nation cannot censor its way back to cultural health
#25I believe in freedom of speech. What I do not believe in is freedom of mass speech. Your responsibility to the truth should increase in line with your reach. Have 1000 followers in twitter and want to talk about starting the next holocaust? Great, say whatever. A million followers? Yeah, that’s a problem. I don’t know how this gets enforced, but we simply cannot give every lunatic a megaphone.
The problem is that this doesn't work. The exact point of free speech is that you need to allow people to say things you don't consider true. Back then, you could've easily argued that he spreads scientific nonsense by saying people are equal and that he shouldn't be allowed to talk to such an audience.
Re: Our nation cannot censor its way back to cultural health
#26While I don't agree with censorship, I think that companies are smart in censoring any fringe ideas, even if those viewpoints ultimately the accepted norm. As soon as a business takes a political stand, then they paint a huge target on their back from legislators and the majority who are fine with them just toeing the line somewhere in the middle. Statistically (which I'm sure they've done studies) it doesn't work in their favor, which a large business usually has one goal which is profit, to align themselves one way or another.
Re: Our nation cannot censor its way back to cultural health
#27The rants about "cancel culture" from the US right are hilarious, given their long history of boycotts of brands they dislike and escalating hate and fear for everything up to actual book burnings of material like Harry Potter. I'm not saying that the accusations of cancel culture are unfounded, I'm saying they are wildly hypocritical. (It's good that efforts at censorship on the right are raised in the article as a…
Yeah, the "you started it" tone of this article is very, very funny. I play the satanic game d&d and listen to metal regularly. No thanks to the right, on those.
Re: Our nation cannot censor its way back to cultural health
#28The rants about "cancel culture" from the US right are hilarious, given their long history of boycotts of brands they dislike and escalating hate and fear for everything up to actual book burnings of material like Harry Potter. I'm not saying that the accusations of cancel culture are unfounded, I'm saying they are wildly hypocritical. (It's good that efforts at censorship on the right are raised in the article as a…
In realpolitik, hypocrisy is a feature not a bug.
Re: Our nation cannot censor its way back to cultural health
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Please explain why that is true.
Because a core value of modern conservatism in the U.S. (as expressed through the leadership of the Republican Party) is questioning the outcomes of freely- and fairly-held elections (including the last Presidential election), to place new obstacles in allowing qualified citizens to vote, and resisting changes that would make it easier for more people to vote (such as voting by mobile phone, or on a weekend).
Re: Our nation cannot censor its way back to cultural health
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
>"I don’t know how this gets enforced, but we simply cannot give every lunatic a megaphone." At least in the US you can't enforce it - and yes, any lunatic can grab a megaphone if they want. The best way to handle problematic speech is more speech, NOT less. Trying to pretend lunatics don't exist is irrational and often a pretext to just block people that others disagree with. Screw that. Safest place for lunatics is…
Well the way things are headed, we’ll be fighting it out in the open IRL soon.
Good. Too many have let things like blatant censorship go on for too long. It's time for more people to be uncomfortable, if for just a little. We are drowning in a morass of complacency :p