Censorship and Social Media

1. 65

   Jessie L Watsonposted 5 years ago

   Pythagoras believed that mental abstractions were more real than the things they purport to represent. If the abstractions are flawed, you don't get reality.
   
   The internet medium and the ethical structures holding it together (or lack thereof) becomes a potent nursery for human creativity and abstraction. It's supposed to enhance our senses so we can realistically apprehend all there is to be found in the real world. (You can certainly debate whether it actually does that).
   
   Kicking people off Twitter for having different ideas must then be a modern form of execution - political or otherwise. Pick off as many people as you want. Reality is the king of the long game.

   replyreport
   1. 95

      wildernessposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      I wasn't aware that there were ethical structures in the internet. 
      
      But what's the alternative?  Forcing some sites to accept and publish whatever others want?  Would you enjoy seeing YOUR HubPages account filled with dozens of hundreds of hubs espousing white supremacy or some other viewpoint you don't agree with?  And then find yourself legally liable for what was put there?

      replyreport
      1. 78

         Kathryn L Hillposted 5 years agoin reply to this

         Deleted
      2. 65

         Jessie L Watsonposted 5 years agoin reply to this

         Wilderness, there's a reason why HP doesn't get overrun with White Nationalists. It's not like there aren't any here but they know everyone will tear their stupid ideas limb from limb.
         
         There is no white nationalist uprising on Twitter or anywhere else for that matter. Let's get real for a second.
         
         And, if these groups have a louder voice its because they have access to the internet like the rest of us. If you spend your career as a hammer (e.g. New York Times Journalist), everyone looks like a nail (percieved White Nationalists).

         replyreport
         1. 95

            wildernessposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            Aw, come on, Jessie.  You know a white nationalist isn't going to care one iota if people on these forums say anything at all.
            
            But that wasn't the point at all: the question is if you would want your website open to anyone that wishes to express opinions that are vastly different than yours; that you find abhorrent and evil.  The White nationalist was mentioned only because most people find them to be just that and I assumed you would too.

            replyreport
   2. 65

      Jessie L Watsonposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      ADDENDUM TO ORIGINAL POST
      
      The other half of finding truth resides in the freedom of expression. It's there to act as a filtration mechanism for bad ideas - not the other way around. By allowing someone space to freely express themselves, you're also subjecting these ideas to the judgment of the group. If your ideas don't have merit, you will find yourself hard-pressed to effect any change in the world. It's a system that we've only had a chance to try out for a couple hundred years...
      
      Censorship is simply confirmation bias for those outspoken few who never had a threateningly large fan base, to begin with, pushing sympathizers further underground and in larger numbers. Then they'll start to wonder if they have to start fighting dirty as well. Hmmm.....

      replyreport
2. 65

   Jessie L Watsonposted 5 years ago

   Also, it's not very bright to target, form a conspiracy around and de-platform people who are already paranoid. *cough cough alex jones cough cough*
   
   True stroke of genius there. I bet Alex is totally reformed now :p
   
   I believe the Anti-Fa Twitter account is still active. The same group who likes to use fascist tactics to get rid of fascism. ...

   replyreport