Live data from Hacker News

You can't censor away extremism or any other problem

freddiedeboer.substack.com

861–863 of 863 posts

Re: You can't censor away extremism or any other problem

#861

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are loosely interpreting the word "suppression". Moderation is more akin to taking back an already provided microphone than it is to "suppression". The baseline for a person's ability to speak does not include someone else's forum. A common example of censorship is with music on the radio: Musicians record a song which contains the word "fuck", which radio hosts would like to play in its entirety, but the hosts a…

> You are loosely interpreting the word "suppression". Moderation / censorship, taxes / theft, capital execution / murder are the same idea, one is just the more palatable way to express the other. > The irony is that the latter case is extremely common practice for many right-wing radio hosts who are equating moderation with censorship It's just as much the case on many left wing broadcast media. Don't conflate "lef…

> one is just the more palatable way to express the other.

If you would have bothered to read my comment, you would have learned that there is an explicit difference in meaning beyond a core idea.

> It's just as much the case on many left wing broadcast media. Don't conflate "left wing" with "openness".

I didn't mention "left wing" at all, nor did I imply that "left wing media" was any better than "right-wing media". Don't conflate criticism of "right-wing media" with blind faith in "left-wing media". My point was that it is "right-wing media" that are wrongly equating moderation with censorship here.

Re: You can't censor away extremism or any other problem

#863
post #759

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The official right wing position towards the left is "your outcome would be lovely, but it isn't worth the excessive cost to getting there". Which makes even less sense, because the right since Regan have nearly continuously run up the deficit. > The right supports environmentalism You cannot simultaneously deny climate change and support the environment. They are mutually exclusive.

> They are mutually exclusive. They aren't. Eg, Germany has an energy policy shaped by an acceptance of global warming and their electricity grid is a hot mess compared to France that has better outcomes on pretty much every axis including emissions if you care about that. The French policy was shaped by military concerns about energy security. And air/water/etc quality in the major US cities were off the charts good…

I (very much) appreciate the thoughtful response, but I have to push back because I don't think you appreciate what climate change trajectory means. At the current rate, much of the planet may become unlivable _within our lives_. While the other kinds of environmental impacts matter, they don't matter as much as (the degree to which) the climate will be impacted. Its a bit like caring about the quality of your car's interior comfort features as you head 80mph into a brick wall.

> Eg, Germany has an energy policy shaped by an acceptance of global warming and their electricity grid is a hot mess compared

They don't, because they don't build nuclear power plants. Simply put, if you don't build nuclear power plants, you don't (fully) understand climate change. Unless you have a plan for your country to use dramatically less energy (which I don't believe is tenable), its the only feasible option in the time frames we need as far as I know.

> I'd bet the actual environmental outcomes in India would improve if they burned fossil fuels like the US and China, then they'd tighten up environmental standards like the west has.

I believe there is not enough time for that process to happen.

Post reply on HN