4 ms·

I would actually be glad if some of the more extreme and irresponsible opinions are deplatformed. It cant be argued that Youtube is expected to platform all ran

• coldtea 8y ago
  >I would actually be glad if some of the more extreme and irresponsible opinions are deplatformed As long as they are ones your culture doesn't share, and/or you happen to disagree with. Which, of course, will make them "objectively" extreme and irresponsible.
• Zenst 8y ago
  Deplatforming, blocking, label and dismissing as forms of dealing with `extremes`, is not only a bad solution, but only fuels those extremes - driving them into their own confirmation bubbles and onto more dangerous forms of outletting their opinions. What needs to happen is solid debate, constructivly listening and then disseminating and showing what they are wrong about and why, with proof. As for platforms, deplatforming gives them PR, fuels their antidisestablishment mentalities and hands them the discrimination card (ironically) as a social form of crying to gain more people sat on the fence and drives them into hopping off on the wrong side. Be far better to listen, debate and handle, heck even if everybody just laughed and pointed - whilst unconstructive, it is far more constructive than the way it is currently handled. But the whole rise of label and dismiss, has become a tool that many use to push their own extreme narratives and group-think mentalities without rationalising what they are actually doing. Imagine if somebody said 2+2 is 5, you would point out what is wrong with that, why and show that it is 4. But society today seems to prefer to label and name call and ignore them without telling them how they are wrong and debating it so they learn. Hence it only fuels and angers those who believe the answer is 5, as they feel ignored, dismissed and in effect, bullied. Then the whole state of victimhood mentalities play out and the only thing debated is done in a confirmation-vacuum by both sides in isolation, giving rise to name calling etc. All rather sad and ugly.
  • godshatter 8y ago
    > What needs to happen is solid debate, constructivly listening and then disseminating and showing what they are wrong about and why, with proof. And also the tougher part, actually being prepared to admit that they might be right about some parts of what they say, interspersed with the things you disagree with. That is what makes a conversation about it fruitful.
    • Zenst 8y ago
      Yes, that may be the case that they are not totally wrong about all aspects of issues they raise, problem is how they present them and with debate those issues can be looked at and what is the root cause. Many issues are often the effect of some overlooked issue and sadly by dismissing the first layer for whatever reasons and not listening and disseminating what they say so it can be broken down and addressed fairly. Well alas that only fuels them into an extreme direction even more, isolating groups in society into political tribalism that ignores the issues thru dismissal of any message other political tribes may gravitate towards. This sadly only widens the gap between the political tribes and fuels the extremist aspects on both sides. But putting the right message across to encapsulate and ring true with both sides without biasing it towards one side or another is a very nuanced skill. Take climate change - people can argue one side or another all day long. But ask them - do you like clean water and air and you will find both sides agreeing. From their you can push thru what is needed on the back of that point over saying we are doing this to tackle climate change. Same result, just politicaly more easily absorbed and equally shifts away from the whole - well their not doing anything so why should we mentalities. If anything you shift that self serving mentality onto your side as they will then think about their air and water quality that they breath and drink as well as their families. You also moot the whole historical data when people will argue that during the dinosaur period it was warmer and other counter arguments to climate change as it is the here and nows air and water they breath. Also easy to point out that if you run a car engine in a closed garage that the air quality is not good for you - something anybody in denial will comprehend and have to accept. But without listening and debating what they said, pulling it apart and getting to the root cause and addressing real issues in a way that all sides can accept. You just see the extremes growing wider and further apart and that is not healthy for either side. Perhaps we should worry about "Social Change" more as the current approach is akin to sweeping under the carpet and pretending there's no dirt and how everything is rosey, even though the distorted landscape hints that it is not and that carpet over time will bulge and bulge if this direction is left unchecked.