Quote:
Originally Posted by FunkMasterFlame
You sure are good at creating straw-men and putting words in peoples mouths while ignoring completely valid counter-arguments.
Again, I believe that it is better that offensive and hateful speech be called out, debunked and and mocked in the public sphere (and yes, that includes people advocating for child abuse  ). Censoring and de-platforming extremists is never going to change their minds, and will possibly bring even more people to their cause due to the fact they are being "persecuted" for their beliefs. I would argue that its more dangerous to society when those people are hiding in their echo-chambers reinforcing each others toxic ideas when there is no dissenting voice there to tell them they're wrong.
You disagree. That's fine. |
I do disagree. We’ve seen the consequences of hate speech being out in the open largely unchecked save for attempts at mocking and debunking. We’ve also seen the consequences of hate speech festering in dumb little isolated circles. The consequences of the latter really pale in comparison to the former.
If you want YouTube to play host to white supremacists and child abusers, that’s great for you, I just don’t believe those types of people are owed a seat at the table. I get that there’s this fantasy that hateful rhetoric can be overcome by reasoned logical arguments and public shaming, but how well has that worked so far? How have Spencer, Molyneux, and David Duke’s minds been changed as society has grown more and more connected and their audiences have increased? Show me examples.
I’m all for combatting white supremacists with love or whatever on an individual level and showing them examples that they’re wrong, but I’m also all for shutting the people whose sole purpose is to grow and mobilise those movements down. You don’t change people’s minds by giving negative influencers more access to them, you change their mind by increasing their exposure to positive influencers.
As for the straw man thing, get over it. If you want to bring up ridiculous examples like “what if anything right of Mao is banned!?” or the dog whistling of you wouldn’t trust your kids with me because..., then expect the same stuff in kind. No need to play dumb or like you’re above putting words in people’s mouths or relying on argumentative fallacies. I’m just responding in kind, but happy to raise the bar whenever you feel you’re ready.