3 ms·

> Bigots, sexists, racists, and hate groups of all stripes use free speech and the idea of censorship as a way to distract from the fact that they're putting in

> Bigots, sexists, racists, and hate groups of all stripes use free speech and the idea of censorship as a way to distract from the fact that they're putting into action what they pretend to only debate. This action/position thing is really tired by now. It was all the rage when Eich was being lynched. I was there, I remember. It wasn't logical then, and it isn't logical now. You would deny your political opponents the ability to effectively participate in the political process. That's undemocratic. > There is no room for hate speech and bigotry in tech By that logic, there's no room for you in tech. You should really do some serious reflection.

yttrium 9y ago
That's the thing though, you're calling someone being forced out because they hold a bigoted position 'lynching'. You're equivocating what has historically been an act of racially provoked murder with the removal of a bigot - there's no justice to be found there. Political opponents ought to (and are, in most cases) barred from effectively participating in the political process when they hold oppressive and bigoted view points.
- explainplease 9y ago
  > That's the thing though, you're calling someone being forced out because they hold a bigoted position 'lynching'. Yes, because in both cases, it's a large group of people reacting emotionally as a group to harm another person. > You're equivocating what has historically been an act of racially provoked murder with the removal of a bigot No I'm not. It's an analogy, not an equivocation. You need to stop using the word "bigot" over and over again. You're framing everything as matter of bigot/not-a-bigot. It's tribal, caveman thinking. "Me not a bigot, they bigot. They bad." > Political opponents ought to (and are, in most cases) barred from effectively participating in the political process when they hold oppressive and bigoted view points. That is literally authoritarianism and oppression. 200 years ago, blacks were barred. 100 years ago, women were barred. Today, "bigots" are barred. Keep this up, and someday, you will be barred. There are only two options here: a) You think you are morally superior to everyone else in the world, therefore everyone who disagrees with you should be barred from participating in the political process. You are therefore a fascistic authoritarian. b) You are unable to reason abstractly, because you are unable to understand how your reasoning applies against your own position.

yttrium 9y ago

That's the thing though, you're calling someone being forced out because they hold a bigoted position 'lynching'. You're equivocating what has historically been an act of racially provoked murder with the removal of a bigot - there's no justice to be found there. Political opponents ought to (and are, in most cases) barred from effectively participating in the political process when they hold oppressive and bigoted view points.

explainplease 9y ago
> That's the thing though, you're calling someone being forced out because they hold a bigoted position 'lynching'. Yes, because in both cases, it's a large group of people reacting emotionally as a group to harm another person. > You're equivocating what has historically been an act of racially provoked murder with the removal of a bigot No I'm not. It's an analogy, not an equivocation. You need to stop using the word "bigot" over and over again. You're framing everything as matter of bigot/not-a-bigot. It's tribal, caveman thinking. "Me not a bigot, they bigot. They bad." > Political opponents ought to (and are, in most cases) barred from effectively participating in the political process when they hold oppressive and bigoted view points. That is literally authoritarianism and oppression. 200 years ago, blacks were barred. 100 years ago, women were barred. Today, "bigots" are barred. Keep this up, and someday, you will be barred. There are only two options here: a) You think you are morally superior to everyone else in the world, therefore everyone who disagrees with you should be barred from participating in the political process. You are therefore a fascistic authoritarian. b) You are unable to reason abstractly, because you are unable to understand how your reasoning applies against your own position.