My current view is that while I want to promote openness and free speech that can really only work in a context where the person exercising their speech feels some necessity to use it responsibly and in an honest way.

On the internet that takes a lot of self control because the social norms of every day life don’t always apply because:

  • no one knows who you are
  • there is not a human being right in front of you that you might feel empathy for
  • there are no consequences to anything you say
  • not all posts are even by humans.

With all these taken together there is a compelling argument that speech may need to be more highly regulated on the internet than in face to face interactions. However there are people with legitimate ( beliefs and ideas honestly held that they wish to discuss ) views that I worry are going to be silenced and further marginalized.

This is bad for society because if people get dismissed or pushed aside it just breeds resentment, distrust, and more misunderstanding. I think as we start defederating and making decisions we are setting up a dangerous situation where it becomes potentially easy to defederate for the wrong reasons.

For instance “we think they are being racist” or “they are spreading misinformation” could have unintended consequences. Some religions and communities might have beliefs that appear to be pseudoscience or even discrimination. However if these are honestly held beliefs that they are willing to engage in civil discourse around I don’t think it’s right to actually block them.

This is likely just the beginning of a much larger discussion so what are your thoughts?—

  • catharticrespite@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    4chan is a great example of what places that consider free speech an indelible right will turn into

    People who have the most vile and hostile opinions will flock there and push most of the reasonable people out

    Talking to a band of brainwashed idiots who hide their hate behind a thin veneer pseudointellectualism gets old pretty fast and, as /pol/ likes to point out, those opinions color their view of reality and will seep into discussions of seemingly unrelated topics

    Most of us don’t want to have to deconstruct some non-sensical ideology every time we make a statement. They think this means their opinions are some hidden truth that we can’t handle.

    The reality is that we can prove them wrong, but they can’t or won’t accept it so we give up on them and go where there are more reasonable people to interact with

    • Fizz@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      I like 4chan but I don’t try and argue I sit by and laugh at the chaos and amazing logic jumps.

      • catharticrespite@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, that’s the way to do it.

        There’s a lot that’s pretty funny, but their narratives about being the last bastion of freedom and enlightenment always rubbed me the wrong way

        Kind of like how subbreddits and circlejerks often go hand in hand. Or how people here like to talk about how it’s soooooo much better than reddit to the point that, no matter how you sort it, the front page is buried in posts saying the same thing