Quote:
Originally Posted by TorqueDog
... illiberal ...
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by PsYcNeT
[posts]
|
This is like a real life version of when you're trying to tell someone about an Amazon Echo and accidentally call it an "Alexa" and it starts responding. "Illiberal, make my point for me." "OK, I'm posting to CalgaryPuck now."
Quote:
Originally Posted by PsYcNeT
Deplatforming #######s is good.
|
For
who? It's not as though Bannon's views aren't already disseminated across the web as it is.
Have you ever changed your mind before? On any subject? Did you come to that conclusion by yourself, or did you get introduced to an idea from another person or source? Have you ever held a position that you now believe to be untenable in the face of the information you have now? I know I have, and it wasn't by putting my fingers in my ears and shielding my precious views from criticism.
As Frum says in the article, Bannon's views are in the open. The difference is that most of the time, you'll see said views on alt-right YouTube videos, ripping on "snowflake ####s" or whatever, being presented without opposition. Deplatforming Bannon in this instance also deplatforms Frum who opposes his views.
Now, having a left-leaning debater take on an alt-righter like Bannon is hardly a novel concept, and frankly I don't see it having much impact on people already in Bannon's camp. I can just imagine the YouTube comments now, tons of "libtard" remarks I'm sure.
The value in this discussion, in my opinion, is having a dyed-in-the-wool conservative like David Frum repudiate someone like Bannon in an open forum. Two people on the right side politically. Both debaters being on the right is a good thing if only because the opposition to the anti-Bannon debater is immediately reduced by way of him being a right-wing conservative.
I've watched debates between people like Anjem Choudary and Majiid Nawaz. Choudary, of course, is far, far worse than someone like Bannon. Hell, he went to prison for five and a half years for inciting people to support and join ISIS through his Islam4UK organization (literally a terrorist group). Sounds like a pretty big ####### to me. Should he have been deplatformed? Why? I found watching the debate interesting, because it revealed the true nature of Choudary's immoral and disgusting views, and gave Nawaz a platform to soundly and swiftly repudiate them. And it gives people a chance to learn, reconsider their position, and ultimately change their minds.
Maybe
you're okay with being shielded from views that disagree with you. Great. Don't buy the debate tickets, don't watch the video, don't read the article. I am personally okay with hearing alternate viewpoints, including ones I don't agree with, because of the points I mentioned in my last post: I better understand the opposing viewpoint (meaning I can better repudiate it myself), if the viewpoint is well supported by evidence then I can look into it further myself and possibly reevaluate my position if warranted.