Comment on The same people who rage against authority love moderating communities where their ideology is the only one allowed

BonkTheAnnoyed@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨8⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

• Voidian@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨6⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  People like to refer to the paradox of tolerance but always skip out on the inconvenient bit:

  ““Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them.

  — In this formulation, 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 most unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols.

  We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant.””

  source

  • cypherpunks@lemmy.ml ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    If you are not able to rationally argue why we shouldn’t be bigoted, I don’t know what to tell you.

    it’s not that people can’t, but spaces which have unlimited tolerance for sealions suggesting that it’s necessary to are likely to have less interesting discussions than spaces which do not 🙄

    source

    • Voidian@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      Then be clear about the rules. I have 0 problems with people creating communities with very clear rules on what is allowed and what isn’t. I wholeheartedly welcome that. What I take issue with is when people claim to have open discussion, or the space is for “rational discourse”, or “anarchist” discourse etc. but then ban everything that doesn’t very exactly align with the mod ideology.

      If most people waving the anarchist flag would admit they’re just doing it because it’s cool but actually, they just want to be the authoritarians in place of the authoritarians, that would be fine. I’d happily avoid them. Problem is that when they don’t admit it, they drag down the whole anarchist ideology because they are misrepresenting it.

      source
  • Waveform@multiverse.soulism.net ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    i think people not knowing how to actually win an argument against a bigot is exactly the reason there are so many these days shit’s easy. not that they’ll admit defeat but getting them babbling irrational nonsense takes very little debating skills. and when they inevitably start throwing ad hominems, then the mods have legitimate grounds to kick them out.

    source
  • BonkTheAnnoyed@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Just to let you know before I block you, I didn’t read your “reasonable disagreement” of a wall of text

    source

    • Voidian@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      You mean the direct quote of Popper that you referred to?

      source
    • Waveform@multiverse.soulism.net ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      >"look up paradox of tolerance UwU” >"ok, let’s look at what it actually says” >"i didn’t read it UwU”

      that tracks

      source

      • BonkTheAnnoyed@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        ¯⁠\⁠_⁠(⁠ツ⁠)⁠_⁠/⁠¯

        source
    • GreenKnight23@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      so I guess you have an intolerance to intolerance?

      source
• bestboyfriendintheworld@sh.itjust.works ⁨7⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  Lemmy is a Tankie Bar.

  source

  • BonkTheAnnoyed@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Okay, that’s just funny. Hi friend

    source
• Evotech@lemmy.world ⁨7⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  So how is that different when it’s online vs offline?

  source