I find it astonishing how presumably sober people think it's reasonable to cry for censorship.
Twitter, It’s Time to End Your Anything-Goes Paradise
111–116 of 116 posts
Re: Twitter, It’s Time to End Your Anything-Goes Paradise
#112Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'm...not even sure how to respond to this historical misunderstanding, other than Wikipedia: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_killings_under_Communist_... . So you didn't actually even read my post. This is what I wrote: > I don't disagree that communist regimes have killed innumerable people And then you continue: > Depending on the particular regime and which groups they designate as the bourgeoisie: Scienti…
Wait: the one who wants to silence speech is you . We are just saying that, if you want to silence people in the name of past mass killings, you have to silence a lot of people. Nazis, communist / socialists, probably even Christians and Muslims, yes. Wouldn't be better to just not try to silence anyone? :)
> Wait: the one who wants to silence speech is you.
> We are just saying that, if you want to silence people in the name of past mass killings, you have to silence a lot of people. Nazis, communist / socialists, probably even Christians and Muslims, yes.
> Wouldn't be better to just not try to silence anyone? :)
No, I'm saying that inherently violent ideologies are different from non-violent ideologies that have been used for violent ends.
Re: Twitter, It’s Time to End Your Anything-Goes Paradise
#113Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wait: the one who wants to silence speech is you . We are just saying that, if you want to silence people in the name of past mass killings, you have to silence a lot of people. Nazis, communist / socialists, probably even Christians and Muslims, yes. Wouldn't be better to just not try to silence anyone? :)
> Wait: the one who wants to silence speech is you. > We are just saying that, if you want to silence people in the name of past mass killings, you have to silence a lot of people. Nazis, communist / socialists, probably even Christians and Muslims, yes. > Wouldn't be better to just not try to silence anyone? :) No, I'm saying that inherently violent ideologies are different from non-violent ideologies that have been…
Good luck drawing a line. Communism advocates destruction of the borgeouisie. Is it inherently violent? "Destruction" seems pretty violent to me.
Re: Twitter, It’s Time to End Your Anything-Goes Paradise
#114Re: Twitter, It’s Time to End Your Anything-Goes Paradise
#115Earlier quoted context omitted.
Advance apologies for getting a little off-topic, but compelled to reply in this case. I'm...not even sure how to respond to this historical misunderstanding, other than Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_killings_under_Communist_... > there is literally nothing in the tenets against groups of people or violence Depending on the particular regime and which groups they designate as the bourgeoisie: Scientis…
> I'm...not even sure how to respond to this historical misunderstanding, other than Wikipedia: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_killings_under_Communist_... . So you didn't actually even read my post. This is what I wrote: > I don't disagree that communist regimes have killed innumerable people And then you continue: > Depending on the particular regime and which groups they designate as the bourgeoisie: Scienti…
As it's XGiving, I lack time to respond in full, but again, compelled to reply to this:
>> At least with national socialism you have a chance to get out. > Not if you're born the wrong way.
This is demonstrably untrue. A good historical example would be the Madagascar Plan, in which Germany was willing to fund the relocation of their "undesirables", but was prevented from doing so by the Allies:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madagascar_Plan
Prior to even this, Nazi Germany absolutely did give their "undesirables" ample opportunity to flee, which led to a major humanitarian crisis (about which the Allies did nothing):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89vian_Conference
The larger point here is that: yes, National Socialism is a certain grade of evil, but as an ideology that offers the chance for their targeted groups to get out, it is significantly and substantially less evil than an ideology that kills/tortures/enslaves ON SIGHT and not only offers no chance of escape, but actively prevents it, as is the case of nearly every implementation of Communism the world has seen thus far.
So, if you are a member of a targeted group, if given a choice between two evils:
1. An evil which hates you but at least gives you the chance to make a life somewhere else.
and
2. An evil which prevents you from leaving and shoots, starves, or enslaves you on sight.
I don't think there is any objective argument to me made that option 1 is somehow worse. Option 2 is objectively more evil.
Perhaps after USXGiving I will have more time to respond to your other points. Cheers!
Re: Twitter, It’s Time to End Your Anything-Goes Paradise
#116Anything goes? Twitter have been actively censoring hashtags, banning people, shadow-banning accounts and most recently "de-verifiying" people due to political differences.
They've been deverifying people for breaking their ToS.