6 ms·
Censorship "theory" is sound. And that's what is so pernicious and dangerous about the idea. The idea of removing content that could cause harm makes total sens
by mikedilger 6y ago
Censorship "theory" is sound. And that's what is so pernicious and dangerous about the idea. The idea of removing content that could cause harm makes total sense. If the people making the censorship decisions were widely respected experts in the field and ideologically neutral, and used extensive and rigorous processes to determine what should be and what shouldn't be censored based on actual harm not political leanings, and were also accountable, then it could in theory be a useful tool.
But censorship practice is utterly corrupt. It's based on ideological goal-driven thinking, a form of thinking most of us use most of the time (unfortunately). The decisions are made by non-experts who are nameless, faceless and unaccountable. The result is dangerous and divisive.
- tomohawk 6y agoToday's expert is tomorrow's outcast or loser. Experts have a vested interest in protecting the prestige of the knowledge they are expert in. If an upstart comes along with information the obsoletes their ideas - just look at what happened to Galileo or any number of other people. And note, that an expert doesn't even have to be wrong to be wrong. What I mean by this is that an expert in epidemiology may be completely correct from that point of view, but that viewpoint does not include all of the other fields of expertise that might be relevant when making decisions at a national level. Tunnel vision is a crazy thing, and causes normally smart people to do silly things.
- ashwoods 6y agoI agree generally with what you say but I’d substitute experts with humans.
- perl4ever 6y agoI remember in the old days, instead of "censors" we called them "editors". It seems like a general rule, that people often get most concerned about something when it is dying out anyway.
- dlivingston 6y agoThere is a brilliant speech by the late Christopher Hitchens [0] on free speech that I must have seen a dozen times. An excerpt: “The freedom of speech is meaningless unless it means the freedom of the person who thinks differently... Don't take refuge in the false security of consensus, and the feeling that whatever you think you're bound to be okay because you're in the safely moral majority. ...Bear in mind, ladies and gentlemen, that every time you violate or propose to violate the free speech of someone else, you, in potentia, are making a rod for your own back.” [0]: https://youtu.be/4Z2uzEM0ugY https://youtu.be/4Z2uzEM0ugY
- commandlinefan 6y agoYou have two choices: no censorship at all, or arbitrary censorship.