4 ms·
Responsibility to the responsible. There's no difference between idiots in churches and idiots on 4chan - both are idiots, both eat up whatever bullcrap is ser
by paskozdilar 4y ago
Responsibility to the responsible.
There's no difference between idiots in churches and idiots on 4chan - both are idiots, both eat up whatever bullcrap is served to them, and both are harmful to society. And neither means that churches or 4chan are bad in themselves.
We must be careful before starting to excuse idiots for their idiotic behavior based on "bad influence". Society is a complex mechanism, and censorship inevitably brings unforseen consequences. Human mind is also complex, and anti-social behavior can sometimes be traced back to early-childhood traumas. Does that mean we should ban free parenting and raise infants in government-approved facilities?
- praptak 4y agoUmm, false dichotomy? Blame the medium, blame the idiots - these are not mutually exclusive. Also, there's a huge gap between supporting censorship and condemning those who amplify harmful messages.
- paskozdilar 4y agoWhy should people posting somewhere be responsible for actions of other people reading their posts?
- praptak 4y agoSame reason you are responsible for shouting "fire" in a crowded theater. Because they know the other people will act on it.
- shitlord 4y agoPeople often use "shouting 'fire' in a crowded theater" as an example alluding to the Schenck case without realizing it was overturned.
- paskozdilar 4y agoErroneous argument - shouting "fire" in a crowded theater has a direct, predictable consequence of people acting on it. Posting stuff on the internet does not.
- w4ffl35 4y agohail satan
- paskozdilar 4y ago:)