The instance seems to be mostly right wing trolls. I know defederating is unpopular but I don't think much is to be lost in this case and it can save the mods some headaches.
Edit: the response on exploding-heads.com to my reporting of transphobia. Courtesy of the "second in command"
No, don't defederate. Just because an instance doesn't align politically with your views doesn't mean that they have to be gone. And we should definetly avoid a mastodon blocklist situation.
If you refuse to meet someone on level ground because you consider them intolerant of your own ideas, you're the one being intolerant.
the marketplace of ideas means fuck all when it comes to people telling you that you shouldn't be allowed to exist
Why should the ground be lowered to a level that fits the criterias of bigots?
If being bigoted is wrong, it doesn't take a genius to prove that, no?
I can disagree with everything they stand for, and think they are absolutely stupid, but god damn do they have a right to be. The mentality stemmed from twitter of "They are just so wrong I wont even listen or let them talk" is so ignorant and authoritarian. What if north korea censored people for saying anything negative about their government? That would be wrong to us, but to them it is based in logic.
The internet has become so used to banning expression, it baffles me. It used to be commonly agreed apon that every individual has a right to thought, and if they're stupid it should be easy to prove them so. Nowadays everyone is censoring everyone they dont like. Some people on the right wanting to stop LGBT content, someone in this thread wanting to censor the Matt Walsh documentary. I've watched it to hear his opinion, despite how much I may disagree with him. And it brought up some good points. If the documentary is so wrong, we should put it out there to show and publicly shame, no? Censorship is the weakest form of countering, no one is the moral authority they may think they are.
Sorry to make this so long but I am tired of people being willingly ignorant because they don't like what someone said. Have a nice day, stranger I disagree with.
god damn it, this "free market of ideas" bullshit never fucking worked
people who are bigots more often than not double down on their bigotry when it's challenged
because it's not a reasoned position they're taking; it's "Things in my life aren't that great, and I don't trust those people; I am going to rationalize to myself that that's their fault" or "I just don't like those people and I want an excuse to hurt them"
like yeah, sometimes it's genuinely not knowing, but if you're constantly proven wrong about your bigotry and you keep doing it then you, on some level, want to continue being bigoted
You are correct. People having free ideas is never going to work if you want everyone to have the same ideas. That's called fascism.
That's not what they're saying but hey, go on defending bigots and their right to use all platforms they feel like using to convert people 🤷
Please explain to me what I misinterpreted so I can understand better. And yes, I will defend the rights of all who want to express their viewpoints.
They're not saying everyone should have the same idea, they're saying arguing with bigots leads to nothing because when they're proven wrong instead of changing their mind they just double down and go further down the rabbit hole. The only way to prevent that is to just not let them take part in the discussion since they're not mature or intelligent enough to do so.
What's that old saying... "You can't reason with somebody who is in a position they didn't reason themselves into". They're not willing to change their minds or have a real discussion, the goalposts will just be moved time and time again when their hateful ideas are challenged.
exactly what I was trying to say
rationally reasoning with bigots rarely leads to bigots abandoning their bigotry; oftentimes it leads to them latching onto something else as an excuse or rationalization for their bigotry, outright violence, or doubling down out of spite
holy shit you have zero comprehension of politics at all, do you
"fascism is when people stop listening to you", right next to "communism is when the government does stuff"
"Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, ultranationalist political ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation and race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy."
Don't try to misinterpret what I said. Censorship of opposing views is attacking someone's right to free speech. Once again, you are correct, you don't have to listen, but they have every right to say. I'm sorry that you truly believe that people that don't like you should be censored. I don't like them either, but censorship is a violation of their rights.
"But this isn't a government entity!" No, its not, but that doesn't mean I can't argue for the right to free speech on here.
"Letting them have a platform will spread hate." The right to hate is part of free speech. Just as you may hate, from what I can tell, republicans/people on the right, they can hate anyone else too. "Speech can be ugly, disgusting, hateful, prejudice, and alarming, but it can never be dangerous to a free society as long as men and women of good will have the freedom of speech to dispute it, challenge it, and reject it."
As my final comment, because this comment chain has gone on for too long... the instance isn't far-right or disgusting. All of the arguing of "They're equal to nazi's!" is an equivocation that resulted in an unrelated argument. They don't have "hate speech", just speech you hate. Anyway, I suggest that BOTH of us stop arguing on here. As good of a point as either one of us may have, I think its clear we're cemented in our morals and are wasting our time. I encourage you to fight for what you believe in, and have a nice day.
not every place in the internet is America
Create a level ground then. Beehaw never said they are a level ground, they are an instance that doesnt want rightoids arguing in bad faith, the same way exploding heads wouldnt want an army of lefties coming in and injecting themselves into every thread.
A level ground where people of whatever affiliation can converse is a great idea. Beehaw doesnt have to be that place
Someone with a brain cell, finally
Unfortunately they just have the one
Anyone who disagrees with you is an idiot, huh? Sounds to me this call for defederation is just to create yet another echo-chamber.
The comment that was a reply to is also calling everyone idiots but somehow you don't have an issue with it?
I have no patience for "both sides" BS, anyone who uses it is obviously not worth listening to
Bragging about your ignorance isn't attractive. Try to be like Daryl Davis, it'll enlighten you.
Good example, someone whose tireless activism that helped avoid openly racist people from getting into positions of power ... oh wait, no, they just got more powerful.
10 years of engaging on reddit taught me that the only way to combat their hateful ideas is to deprive them of oxygen
What are you even on about? How has Daryl's work caused KKK members to get into more powerful positions?
lmao, what a pathetic comment. "10 years of engaging on reddit"
His efforts did nothing to stop them, one got elected as president.
If my comment is pathetic why are you trying to divert from what I said?
I didn't divert from what you said lol, I replied to both parts.
And get real, Donald Trump's a retard, but he's not a KKK member. Is he racist? Yeah, I think he is, but he's not my president, so I don't give a fuck. Trump got elected because investors and corporations saw an avenue to make money, and they did.
You're not very good at this, are you?
Rules, my dude, keep the attacks to yourself.
Doctor, heal thyself
But you're the one trying to pretend ignorance is a valid viewpoint? While I've not been to the supposed shithole in question and i don't really care about this instance specifically, there is no merit to transphobia or COVID conspiracy, pretending otherwise is flying in the face of reality.
I don't think ignorance is a valid viewpoint, that's why I'm criticising you.
I have been to the website, which you should visit before making claims about them. It's a little edgy, but nothing extraordinarily bigoted or nasty.
Who are you to say there's no merit in their views? Can you disprove them? If so, why don't you?
Because it's useless to argue against opinions not based on facts.
It is, yeah. you can't reason people in an unreasonable position. I recommend trying to appeal emotionally.
If people can't be reasoned with with facts then they're not worth arguing with because they don't have the intelligence or maturity to form logical opinions and will just as easily be swayed back into their previous, and wrong, position.
I agree, but in public spaces you can still make them look like a fool.
The problem being that they still manage to convert people even when they look like fools to the majority and the only way to prevent that is to keep them out of the discussion altogether.
Bullshit that's the only way.
I mentioned this before, but Daryl Davis has used discussion and understanding to convert KKK members out of their hateful ideology. It's a method that works and is worth chasing for. Hell, I'll make it easier to convince you, you've heard of the Paradox of Intolerance, yes?
also downvote me? i downvote you. lol (Not like it does anything on this site, but feel free)
You're talking about someone meeting people in person, it has nothing to do with the situation at hand because anonymous people on the internet will never be as reasonable as people you're speaking face to face with.
If you knew anything about the paradox of intolerance you would also know that the philosopher behind it also said that only those who have arguments based on reason should be allowed to speak their intolerant message because only they can be reasoned with. The alt-right doesn't base its message on facts or reality, therefore they shouldn't be tolerated.
haaah, caught you now. Here, you used an offline persona as justification that censoring online communities works.
But once I use an offline persona as justification that discussion works, suddenly it's invalid.
How embarrassing. Just in case you delete your comment, I'm going to tag you, @Kecessa
🤔
🐐