4 ms·

> Homophobia is unacceptable, and combatting it is not totalitarianism <x> is unacceptable is a typical totalitarian pattern. In free societies all views deser

> Homophobia is unacceptable, and combatting it is not totalitarianism <x> is unacceptable is a typical totalitarian pattern. In free societies all views deserve a place, even those that you personally don't like.

throwaway234101 6y ago
This whole thread proves that free speech isn't possible in any society. The only question is who gets to decide what is verboten.
- dschuessler 6y ago
  Interesting. The whole thread proves to me the exact opposite. That free speech is very alive since nothing here has been censored yet. The only way I can explain our disparate perceptions is that we're talking about entirely different things. By "free speech" I mean not being arrested or physically harmed for saying something. Is it possible that by "free speech" you in contrast mean being entitled to be invited, keeping your job, and/or remaining uncontradicted?
  - throwaway234101 6y ago
    > By "free speech" I mean not being arrested or physically harmed for saying something. Go out in public and read random passages from the bible. See how long you go before being assaulted and/or arrested.
  - josteink 6y ago
    I would have agreed to your statement until around now-ish when this entire discussion-tree got flagged, including my mostly factual root-comment. Around the same time the San Fransisco morning/lunch shift kicked in? You’re only allowed to have such “controversial” discussions here in European time-zones it seems ;)
    - dschuessler 6y ago
      Well, we’re still neither arrested nor physically harmed, aren’t we? So our speech is still free. Ycombinator is not obliged to give our discussion a visible platform. Here’s the obligatory xkcd: https://xkcd.com/1357/ https://xkcd.com/1357/
      - throwaway234101 6y ago
        > So our speech is still free. No. That's not what free speech is. Free speech is being able to speak your mind without restriction. There is no such thing as free speech in the US, either culturally or legally. This is not to be confused with the 1st amendment which does not guarantee "free speech", but rather guarantees political speech against the government. You should read A History of the Freedom of Thought by JB Bury[0]. [0]: https://www.gutenberg.org/files/10684/10684-h/10684-h.htm#:~:text=A%20History%20of%20Freedom%20of,with%20almost%20no%20restrictions%20whatsoever https://www.gutenberg.org/files/10684/10684-h/10684-h.htm#:~....
katktv 6y ago
If we let intolerant people thrive, we will build a system where intolerance thrives while tolerant people, as well as the people the intolerance is directed towards, will be dealt with in a totalitarian way. "Paradox of tolerance" is a fundamentally liberal idea coined by Karl Popper, and it is fundamental to a free society, as the Soviet and Nazi regimes have shown by essentially targeting the same people under different coats of paint.
- Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
  I have heard this "Paradox of tolerance" mantra many times. And in my opinion it is the doorway to a totalitarian society, which is perfectly demonstrated to us by cancel culture excesses. It is basically a terrorist tactic, scaring people into making them keep their mouths shut. If you claim to be 'tolerant', but do not tolerate those who aren't, you are not really tolerant. Period. What a truly tolerant person should do with those who aren't, is to find ways to persuade them to change their ways. It is not impossible. Civil rights movements in 1960s or suffrage movement achieved success not by scaring 'white racists' or 'male supremacists' into submission, but by persuading a sufficient number of them that segregation or discrimination based on sex is bad.
  - dschuessler 6y ago
    Well then be tolerant towards those who open the doorway to a totalitarian society. Period. See the paradox kicking in?
    - josteink 6y ago
      No. We can argue (like we do now) that moving towards a totalitarian society is a bad idea. No paradox.
  - gremlinsinc 6y ago
    So, you should tolerate Nazi's, even if they are jumping at the bit to kill and murder jews and bring back gas chambers? What if somebody runs on that very platform issue for congress -- legalizing the murdering of jews? would that be okay? should we tolerate it? I mean ... if it's legal...it's a perfectly good view point (it is NOT ...devils advocate). Tolerating people being themselves and living their own lives independent of you VS tolerating specific hate speech and allowing it to thrive online are TWO totally different things. There is no comparison betwixt the two.

throwaway234101 6y ago

This whole thread proves that free speech isn't possible in any society. The only question is who gets to decide what is verboten.

dschuessler 6y ago
Interesting. The whole thread proves to me the exact opposite. That free speech is very alive since nothing here has been censored yet. The only way I can explain our disparate perceptions is that we're talking about entirely different things. By "free speech" I mean not being arrested or physically harmed for saying something. Is it possible that by "free speech" you in contrast mean being entitled to be invited, keeping your job, and/or remaining uncontradicted?
- throwaway234101 6y ago
  > By "free speech" I mean not being arrested or physically harmed for saying something. Go out in public and read random passages from the bible. See how long you go before being assaulted and/or arrested.
- josteink 6y ago
  I would have agreed to your statement until around now-ish when this entire discussion-tree got flagged, including my mostly factual root-comment. Around the same time the San Fransisco morning/lunch shift kicked in? You’re only allowed to have such “controversial” discussions here in European time-zones it seems ;)
  - dschuessler 6y ago
    Well, we’re still neither arrested nor physically harmed, aren’t we? So our speech is still free. Ycombinator is not obliged to give our discussion a visible platform. Here’s the obligatory xkcd: https://xkcd.com/1357/ https://xkcd.com/1357/
    - throwaway234101 6y ago
      > So our speech is still free. No. That's not what free speech is. Free speech is being able to speak your mind without restriction. There is no such thing as free speech in the US, either culturally or legally. This is not to be confused with the 1st amendment which does not guarantee "free speech", but rather guarantees political speech against the government. You should read A History of the Freedom of Thought by JB Bury[0]. [0]: https://www.gutenberg.org/files/10684/10684-h/10684-h.htm#:~:text=A%20History%20of%20Freedom%20of,with%20almost%20no%20restrictions%20whatsoever https://www.gutenberg.org/files/10684/10684-h/10684-h.htm#:~....

katktv 6y ago

If we let intolerant people thrive, we will build a system where intolerance thrives while tolerant people, as well as the people the intolerance is directed towards, will be dealt with in a totalitarian way. "Paradox of tolerance" is a fundamentally liberal idea coined by Karl Popper, and it is fundamental to a free society, as the Soviet and Nazi regimes have shown by essentially targeting the same people under different coats of paint.

Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
I have heard this "Paradox of tolerance" mantra many times. And in my opinion it is the doorway to a totalitarian society, which is perfectly demonstrated to us by cancel culture excesses. It is basically a terrorist tactic, scaring people into making them keep their mouths shut. If you claim to be 'tolerant', but do not tolerate those who aren't, you are not really tolerant. Period. What a truly tolerant person should do with those who aren't, is to find ways to persuade them to change their ways. It is not impossible. Civil rights movements in 1960s or suffrage movement achieved success not by scaring 'white racists' or 'male supremacists' into submission, but by persuading a sufficient number of them that segregation or discrimination based on sex is bad.
- dschuessler 6y ago
  Well then be tolerant towards those who open the doorway to a totalitarian society. Period. See the paradox kicking in?
  - josteink 6y ago
    No. We can argue (like we do now) that moving towards a totalitarian society is a bad idea. No paradox.
- gremlinsinc 6y ago
  So, you should tolerate Nazi's, even if they are jumping at the bit to kill and murder jews and bring back gas chambers? What if somebody runs on that very platform issue for congress -- legalizing the murdering of jews? would that be okay? should we tolerate it? I mean ... if it's legal...it's a perfectly good view point (it is NOT ...devils advocate). Tolerating people being themselves and living their own lives independent of you VS tolerating specific hate speech and allowing it to thrive online are TWO totally different things. There is no comparison betwixt the two.