This is hands down the most unhinged thing I’ve read in a long while. You really ought to go to touch grass or something my guy. I’ve never even seen someone say shit like this on 4chan, thats how absolutely unhinged you are dude,

https://news.gallup.com/poll/645704/slim-majority-adults-say-changing-gender-morally-wrong.aspx

Accepting that people can live as they wish is not the same thing as transphobia not being a common view.

I don’t think there’s a lot of bad people in the world as in people with bad intentions. I’d say they are ignorant and selfish.

Yes, that’s how systems perfect themselves. Once more Hegel is proven correct.

What if the people never agree with you? What if you can never convince them that for example transgender women should be able to use the women’s bathroom? What if people elect officials that pass laws to make sure they can’t? Would you accept that outcome peacefully as part of the democratic process? Would you be content with what the people have chosen? Democracy can be as tyrannical as any other system, for progressives there is a moral imperative to not accept outcomes that hurt people even if it is done through the democratic process.

If the best course of action is the only choice then there isn’t a choice at all.

For example we might know that universal healthcare is better for society in almost every aspect, however people might feel that they prefer lower taxes regardless of the benefits that universal healthcare might provide and so they vote against a measure to establish universal healthcare. This is the people choosing out of their own free will to vote against their best interests, democracy is ok with bad outcomes that result out of collective choice. The progressive movement is not ok with negative outcomes, and as such will always choose the best course of action.

The “progressive” movement in the US is without a doubt 100% the unaware foot soldiers of the elites. Every single thing the movement supports only helps to further entrench capital into power. The file and rank of the progressives are well intentioned, no doubt, and the goals are nobles. But because the idea is to solve problems from the top down instead of the bottom up, all it serves is to further create methods for capitalism to solve the internal contradictions that would otherwise result in its collapse. Furthermore it is not a democratic movement nor interested in democracy in any shape or form and saying so is as much newspeak as fascist saying the same thing. It is a technocratic movement that dismisses the wisdom of the masses for the wisdom of the experts, and I do not think that’s necessarily a problem in practice, the problem is that people, as stupid as they are, are smart enough to realize that either you believe in democracy or you believe in doing whatever is scientifically, statistically or mathematically is proven to be better but both things cannot be true at the same time. Honestly I feel like progressives would fare better if they actually had a mask off moment and actively campaigned on that.

I find that it’s pretty much the same if not worse on here on certain topics. Like you might agree on the problem but if you disagree on the solution as generally accepted by whoever sets the agenda you are the enemy. I’m banned from some political instances because I have dared question the progressive’s positions/solutions on certain topics. Like apparently because your goal is morally “right” that justifies using stupid ass solutions instead of attempting to fix deeper rooted issues.

Oh I’m also generally allowed to say retarded on here, but we’ll see if that’s true.

This is a common problem in the evaluation of almost everything I find. I always assume that any technology will improve with time whether in ways that are perceptible or imperceptible but increase efficiency. Most people seem to be unable to make that assumption and simply judge things as they are at the very moment. I guess it is somewhat pragmatic but it is unreasonable, every technology, even the most primitive we still find ways to improve.

In the sense of renewables, it will soon be common sense and economic reality that it is superior to non renewables, if not for the fact that extracting the resource is a much more passive and less labor intensive activity than extracting coal or oil out of the ground. We were held back by the cost of the tech but advances in efficiency and recycling of materials has made them the sensible economic choice.

But the oil mongers won’t go out without a fight: where I live they are putting a tax on the sun itself because imagine someone just being able to generate their own energy off the grid like that, anarchy!

Only in political systems that were not designed with partisanship in mind and thus became the worse partisan shithole to be conceived.

It gave them the excuse to build their own platforms in which their ideas could spread uncontested and at the same time made them more alluring to the masses because “forbidden” knowledge is so alluring to humans that perhaps the most famous myth in history is about how our species lost the perfect existence because of it.

You cannot make anything forbidden and expect that by doing so it won’t spread because it is forbidden. As long as there is a demand for it it will continue to spread and if the Streisand effect holds it will spread exponentially. This applies to ideas, drugs, guns, and pretty much everything. If the people want it they will get it. Alcohol is the perfect example: we tried to make it illegal and all it did was increase crime, violence and people kept drinking as much if not more than before. Fast forward to today people drink less than ever because they have learned the health effects of it. Give people the tools to tell right from wrong, correct from incorrect instead of trying to bubble wrap their world and then act surprised when they feel betrayed because someone told them there is another point of view (false as it may be). Let them see both point of views and let the very absurdity of the opposite view discredit itself.

If we cannot trust that people can make the correct decisions why then would we insist on democracy?

It’s not about the factuality of the information though, it’s about the subjectivity of the label. Harmful, hateful, etc are not objective measurable labels and so they can be used to shut down any sort of speech. The paternalistic position that we need to protect people from falsehoods or harmful ideas is frankly condescending. Like I said elsewhere if I cannot believe that people are capable of separating truth from fact, then I must also believe that they are fundamentally incapable of making decisions and therefore I need to take away any ability for them to make any kind of significant decision. I will not follow this line of thought in my life or politics, because then who gets to decide who is capable of making decisions? The experts in their ivory towers? The only experts with apodictic knowledge are physicists and mathematicians, everyone else operates on degrees of certainty, they can be wrong. And furthermore who decides who are the experts? This is a return to aristocracy or monarchy, but instead of divine authority it is credentialist.

If we want to stop people from believing stupid shit the solution is not to attempt to bubble wrap their world as it were, but rather to give them the tools to discern good information from bad information.

If I’m to believe that I need to protect people from “bad” ideas and that they are not capable of discerning right from wrong, false from truth, them I will also have to believe that democracy itself is wrong because clearly we cannot allow these monkeys to make any decisions. Now while my heart of hearts might believe this to be true, I do not have apodictic certainty in that and instead I truly believe that education can make people take better decisions and help them discern right from wrong. As such I can never believe in labeling speech as allowed or not allowed, rather I would like to invest my energies into fostering curiosity, truth seeking and knowledge as perhaps the highest human virtues. So instead of burying speech we should be educating kids.

Also X kind of proves my point, the platform is alive but much less relevant than before. This is the bad ideas discrediting themselves in action.

This is about the only good reply because it’s honest. Very based.

Ok I understand that you, like me are a chimp, but we need to try to overcome tribalism as much as we can. By that I mean stop thinking that anyone belongs to the opposite tribe of yours simply because they don’t subscribe to dogmatic political agendas. I’m not taking any side except the side of logic and reasoning. Prohibiting or restricting speech or ideas has never stopped them from spreading or otherwise gaining traction if the ground for them is fertile. So what’s even the point? We used to have the KKK on tv and through the sheer idiocy of their ideas they still failed as a political organization.

Invest your energies on fomenting curiosity and truth seeking in people not on removing “harmful” speech. Those are arbitrary labels that we can apply to anything, as Trump et all are showing.

I don’t know that I believe in that sort of paternalistic attitude what I do know is that Google et al have no business dictating what is or isn’t misinformation. It’s a double edged blade.

People will believe whatever they want to believe, you cannot suppress whatever you believe is misinformation. There are lots of things for which there is no apodictic certainty that gets passed of as fact and no one questions it or calls it misinformation.

Also it’s not that it wasn’t a perfect solution. It’s that it is not a solution at all. It actively made things worse in fact.

People in the streets say crazier shit every day, are you also gonna stop them from saying it? Fuck that man, the audience is the one that needs to learn to be discerning.

Fuck outta here with this fuckhead logic.

This is not a bad thing actually. “Deplatforming” idiots clearly did not stop their ideas from spreading so might as well allow people to say whatever inane shit they want instead of getting them riled up for “censorship”.

I know it’s not real censorship but technicalities hardly matters. What matters is how people feel.

Oh no chemicals! We should indeed not consume chemicals, which is why starting today I will no longer consume anything that has water in it.

Two decades of “just learn to code bro”, will do that to a profession.