Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield
No. The argument is one of degree within points two and three. And that seems and probably is an easy debate between people like us.
The problem is there exist a huge number of morons in the country who believe that disagreement with their orthodoxy deserves severe punishment by powerful private organizations. And their right to request such punishment is itself free speech.
This I think will create a bifurcated public square. There will be conversation like what we have here, and there will be shouting among the morons.
The problem is, corporations respond to the morons. There aren’t enough of us to buy their products, so they must punish a few of those the mob demands to be sacrificed.
We can spot the morons and ignore them, but for content producers and public figures there remains a chilling effect. You see this playing out already. Privately, everyone rolls their eyes at the most extreme voices, but publicly everyone pretends to take them seriously to avoid becoming a target of their ire.
I think this is bad because it allows the dimwits to remain extreme and think it’s acceptable. They fail to develop critical thinking and become more orthodox. Society splits into Those Who Know Better and The Mobs of Imbeciles.
I guess it’s a self-correcting problem, as it allows the extreme right and extreme left to battle over who are the bigger idiots while the rest of us go about our business. But these nuts vote.
|
I trust you saw the admission that they cancelled Greenwald from signing the letter because they didn’t like his views.
The whole discussion is a joke driven be deeply unserious people who just don’t like the concept of accountability.
