On Tue, 6 Aug 2019, Rob McEwen wrote:
I'm so tired of this thread - but the bottom line is that censorship and even
the definition of "hate" and "racism" (especially when used in the
vernacular!) are extremely subjective and can lead to situations where
reasonable people disagree. And if/when such policies are implemented to try
to limit or shut down such speech, horrific unintended collateral damage will
LIKELY occur. Also, totalitarian regimes OFTEN use the same arguments to get
their foot in the door of controlling and suppressing speech. Even now, the
mainstream news media is ALREADY highlighting a very selective part of these
murderer's ideologies, and suppressing other parts, in order to convey an
overall impression of their ideologies that doesn't actually match them, but
furthers certain biased agendas. So actions to suppress "hate speech" and
"racism" based on the 1/2 truths that most have been brainwashed to believe
about these evil murderers' beliefs (1/2 contradicted by their own actual
writings, which are already evil!), is ALREADY well on its way towards
potentially causing collateral damage by unplugging or suppressing
forums/platforms that really don't closely match the actual ideology of the
shooters.
those who perform political curation of content are at risk of losing
their section 230 protections.
archive.fo/zOUBG
if you really want this to happen, go ahead and "remove racism out of
internet". you won't like the result.
-Dan