5 ms·

This is a fine argument for censorship in general. Sadly, we have centuries of evidence that such an approach is ultimately futile. If you concede that censorsh

This is a fine argument for censorship in general. Sadly, we have centuries of evidence that such an approach is ultimately futile. If you concede that censorship "definitely works better than discussion", you're ultimately conceding the debate. A far better approach is to draw a hard red line and not allow anyone to cross it - e.g. if you're advocating for ending democracy or free speech - no democracy or free speech for you. Otherwise, you gotta find a way to defeat bad ideas without trying to shut them out. If you attempt to censor (use whatever euphemisms you prefer, but that's all it is), you'll fail, and do irreparable damage to your own arguments in the process.

j_wtf_all_taken 5y ago
But who then decides if someone crossed that red line? And what if that decision is being done in bad faith? Again, I am not talking about censorship by the government. I am talking about some people deciding its not worth to listen to some other people, and therefore not giving them a platform? Isn't that my free choice - you can talk freely, but I can just not listen to you? Isn't what you propose - taking away the right to free speech - far worse than censorship? Would you jail people if they still speak freely after they crossed that red line?
- Moodles 5y ago
  Honestly if a bunch of people wanted to censor someone I would want to listen to that person even more. I also think you’re kinda playing Devil’s advocate a bit much here. We have red lines in conversations already. E.g. advocating violence against another group of people is a red line for a lot of people. E.g. Advocating the superiority of one particular race is usually a red line for people.
  - j_wtf_all_taken 5y ago
    > Honestly if a bunch of people wanted to censor someone I would want to listen to that person even more. Sure, you can do that. For me, it would probably depend on who did the "censoring" (see below). > I also think you’re kinda playing Devil’s advocate a bit much here. Wait, who's the devil here? Seriously, I have no idea what you mean. Again: it am not talking about censorship by the government, I am simply talking about not listening to certain people. For me, in Germany, I would for example categorically refuse to listen to and engage in discussions with voters of the "AfD" party (right-wing party, with one leader that you can officially call a fascist based on a court decision) or the so called "Querdenker" people.

j_wtf_all_taken 5y ago

But who then decides if someone crossed that red line? And what if that decision is being done in bad faith? Again, I am not talking about censorship by the government. I am talking about some people deciding its not worth to listen to some other people, and therefore not giving them a platform? Isn't that my free choice - you can talk freely, but I can just not listen to you? Isn't what you propose - taking away the right to free speech - far worse than censorship? Would you jail people if they still speak freely after they crossed that red line?

Moodles 5y ago
Honestly if a bunch of people wanted to censor someone I would want to listen to that person even more. I also think you’re kinda playing Devil’s advocate a bit much here. We have red lines in conversations already. E.g. advocating violence against another group of people is a red line for a lot of people. E.g. Advocating the superiority of one particular race is usually a red line for people.
- j_wtf_all_taken 5y ago
  > Honestly if a bunch of people wanted to censor someone I would want to listen to that person even more. Sure, you can do that. For me, it would probably depend on who did the "censoring" (see below). > I also think you’re kinda playing Devil’s advocate a bit much here. Wait, who's the devil here? Seriously, I have no idea what you mean. Again: it am not talking about censorship by the government, I am simply talking about not listening to certain people. For me, in Germany, I would for example categorically refuse to listen to and engage in discussions with voters of the "AfD" party (right-wing party, with one leader that you can officially call a fascist based on a court decision) or the so called "Querdenker" people.