Our problem is that the establishment supports evil speech and suppresses truth. Yes, we’ve failed as a society. The establishment has always had the power to control speech. It’s not because we gave them that power.
If it needs to be banned, we've already failed as a society. Society should reject intolerance and value intelligence/knowledge. Giving anyone the ability to control speech. Gives the worst sort of person the absolute need to wield that ability.
humanspiral@lemmy.ca 1 week ago
Eldritch@piefed.world 1 week ago
Then if the establishment supports evil speech and is simultaneously also the only one capable of enforcing this. Why would you want to give them that power? Any establishment given that sort of power. Would instantly use it to suppress speech that is inconvenient to them.
Complex problems generally don't have simple solutions. And anyone offering you a simple solution to a complex problem likely thinks you're a fool.
humanspiral@lemmy.ca 1 week ago
Why would you want to give them that power?
Democracy is supposed to be allowed to exterminate evil. A theoretical outcome of democracy is less fascism with laws that prevent fascist power, with political campaigns promissing to erradicate demonic supremacist foreign control over the nation. It is genuinely that simple: Proposed laws to exterminate evil influence over establishment.
Eldritch@piefed.world 1 week ago
Just because something is technically a democracy doesn't mean it has value. Any democracy that is not direct, accountable, or consenting. Isn't much of a democracy. And democracy exterminates nothing. Any democracy that does, isn't much of a democracy. Advocating for authoritarianism absolutely makes things less democratic though.
We didn't get here overnight, and there is nothing we can do that would get us out of this position anytime soon. Especially not reducing democracy. It's going to take a lot of hard work and cultural change. Teaching people to value understanding and knowledge. Only education can eradicate ignorance, but never completely.
Katana314@lemmy.world 1 week ago
This already assumes a generationally informed and educated populace, which is the end goal and wouldn’t really need any “systems” to improve information sources. Everyone participating would naturally reject falsehoods.
The difficulty is working out what system should exist in a world of massive morons.
Eldritch@piefed.world 1 week ago
I may be biased as an anarchist, but what about anarchism? Why would a flat, answerable government based largely on consent and mutual aid be a bad thing? Isn't the current problem unanswerable people with too much power already. Why would we want to give them more power. That's definitionally madness to me. If my ideals are any good, I think I should be able to convince them of that without force.