3 ms·
What is this dreck? Somehow it's the fault of a Saudi prince's exploratory investments that people in the USA want to use their constitutionally-protected righ
by core-questions 8y ago
What is this dreck?
Somehow it's the fault of a Saudi prince's exploratory investments that people in the USA want to use their constitutionally-protected right to free speech on the Internet? How absolute dare they!
There is no such thing as hate speech. There is free speech, and there is censorship. Kara Swisher seems to be mad that there is not yet enough censorship for her tastes, which I think would extend to domain registrar or even ARIN deplatforming of any site or network that dares host the comments of someone who says something she is uncomfortable with.
I find it reprehensible that anyone can even consider curtailing speech as a kneejerk reaction to violence. It's crystal clear to me that further censorship is actually going to add fuel to the fire, as those with evil opinions will have no outlet, no chance of counterargument or of being convinced toward nonviolent action, no support from other people in their emotional struggle. As though censorship will be successful this time at enabling the security of the establishment, even though it didn't work in China or Russia.
We'll painfully rediscover the lessons of the past, probably with more death and mayhem. Just as much of it will be on the hands of the censors as is on the hands of those who facilitate speech; it's up to you to decide if that's a nonzero amount.
- yongjik 8y ago> ... no support from other people in their emotional struggle. Are you actually proposing better mental healthcare for Americans (which would be super awesome), or are you suggesting that gab.com and its likes count as "emotional support"?
- core-questions 8y agoI'm absolutely in favour of better mental healthcare, including increased funding, though I'm also in favour of committing people who would otherwise end up being drug-addicted and homeless, so we may still not see eye to eye on this. I do believe that everyone needs a bit of community and a bit of emotional support. The Internet can indeed provide this for people, but there's a risk when people get into echo-chambers - regardless of whether we're talking about right wing extremists, or tumblr social justice warriors. The ideal state is one in which we're still continually introduced to things we may not completely agree with, and one in which we're all free to debate and discuss even controversial topics. Deplatforming and censorship hurt that effort, drive it underground, and further the formation of deep discontent.
- charlesism 8y agoI find it reprehensible that anyone can even consider curtailing speech as a kneejerk reaction to violence. Can we still curtail the yelling of "fire" in a crowded theatre?
- core-questions 8y agoThis tired, tired meme. It's a few hundred years old by now, isn't it? Does anyone who has a reasonable outlook on life really think that issuing a command that instantiates an instant tribal mob mentality on a cloistered group of people is the same as political speech? False equivocations that you don't even really believe yourself aren't exactly good counter-arguments.
- charlesism 8y agoI have no enthusiasm for our exchange, to be honest. We won't have enough common ground. So I'll just bow out, and wish you a lovely evening.
- rasteau 8y agoHitchens responds: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jyoOfRog1EM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jyoOfRog1EM
- michaelmrose 8y agoPeople find truth in repetition and social proof that the belief is shared by those they regard as their peers. Ugly openly available hate groups attract followers of various sorts and allow them to bounce hateful ideas back and forth among themselves that serve to cement the truth of these poorly thought out world views as part of their deeper view of the world. Those who are mild are more likely to find themselves subserviently listening to those who are bolder and more extreme. The latter will certainly garner a larger audience and gradually seem "truer" to the rest of the community. The people who merely wrongly believe that jewish people are somehow hogging all the money garner less attention than those who believe they are conspiring to harm us all and calls for violent action are heard above those who call for reason and sanity. People self select groups of people to communicate with who reinforce their existing beliefs because this is intellectually comfortable and they rarely change their opinion when they rarely encounter a dissenting view. You probably can't keep deviants from talking to one another short of implementing 1984 but it seems highly likely that we could in fact probably drive most of the trash underground if we were so inclined and thus keep a lot of people out of the intellectual mud in the process. The argument that "it wont work" seems to be from a deficit of imagination or wishful thinking.