>Being anti-censorship makes you a Nazi apologist
Post
Remote status
Context
5@RustyCrab @scathach It's not an apriori thing as such, it's a doctrine with a specific goal: to prevent power from leveraging an ability to control communication (and therefore thought) into a destructive tyranny.
in edge cases there's room for interpretation but the overall intent of it is pretty clear and useful.
@bajax @RustyCrab @scathach I've always taken it to mean that no word, concept, or idea in and of itself should ever be criminalized or forbidden. Second order consequences emerging from the use of said words, concepts, or ideas being considered separate issues in their own right.
Hence the "shouting fire in a crowed theater" argument... obviously the second order consequences of knowingly initiating a stampede are not (and shouldn't be) protected, even if the word "fire" or the concept of fires aren't illegal.
Replies
0Fetching repliesβ¦