• @jet@hackertalks.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -4
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    I’m very consistent in my views, I do not tolerate anyone being de-platformed. I am intolerant of de-platforming. I do not tolerate anyone trying to remove the voice of anyone else.

    I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be unwise. - Poppel The Open Society and It’s Enemies

    De-platforming is a form of rhetorical suppression, as OPs article points out.

    • @moody
      link
      48 months ago

      Which means that you tolerate intolerance.

      as long as we can counter them by rational argument

      The saying goes that you can’t reason someone out of a position they didn’t reason themselves into.

      De-platforming is a means to show that the platform doesn’t want to be associated with specific content. Being against de-platforming means you are on the side of forced speech.

      • @jet@hackertalks.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -3
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        I’ve never heard the term forced speech before, the only references I can find are legal referring to compelled testimony in court. Can you give me a reference so I can better understand you?

        The saying goes that you can’t reason someone out of a position they didn’t reason themselves into.

        I’m afraid I missed that part of Open Society, my understanding is the intolerance of tolerance was making it criminal to have calls to violence, at least as I understood the book.

    • ram
      link
      fedilink
      English
      18 months ago

      Finna deplatform you right now with the block button, babes 💞