4 ms·
> Isn't it far better to encourage bad ideas to come out of the shadows, where those who espouse them can do battle (and face defeat) in their name? In an idea
by MrRadar 9y ago
> Isn't it far better to encourage bad ideas to come out of the shadows, where those who espouse them can do battle (and face defeat) in their name?
In an ideal world I would agree. However, we are in a far from ideal world and our experiences since the Internet began show that this rarely happens in the real world.
CGP Grey did an excellent video on how the dynamics of speech tend to play out on the Internet: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rE3j_RHkqJc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rE3j_RHkqJc tl;dw: we self-segregate and our "tribes" rarely end up interacting in a meaningful manner. The consequence of that is allowing hate speech to exist in a space invites more hate speech in a self-reinforcing cycle (probably the best example of this is 4chan).
We've also seen what happens when hateful speech is banned. When reddit banned /r/fatepeoplehate the amount of anti-fat bullying on the site dropped precipitously. Does this not point the way forward on how to deal with hateful speech?
- UncleEntity 9y ago> Does this not point the way forward on how to deal with hateful speech? Yep, private entities should have every right to do (or not do) business with whoever they choose. One could even argue this was the intended meaning of "freedom of association" (if they wanted to get modded down in an practical display of this theory in practice if they were so inclined I suppose). The main argument I usually see from the "pro-free speech" folks is once you give the government the power to ban "bad" speech then there's nothing stopping them from using this power against your "good" speech.