“This is surrender, not principle.”
@GSpellchecker on how closing your eyes doesn’t make the problem disappear.https://www.gspellchecker.com/2016/12/the-chicago-review-of-books-attempts-a-stand-against-milo-yiannopoulos-and-bolsters-his-rhetoric-instead/ …
That said, I don’t think this problem is solvable under Capitalism and the privately-owned “public sphere”.
-
-
If discourse is hosted on private land, people are within their rights to ask the owner “do you agree with what is hosted on your platform?”
-
If, for example, a shopping mall permits an alt-right/neo-nazi stand, they are saying that they find that acceptable on their property.
-
The core problem is that, under Capitalism, we lack a public sphere. All our public spaces are privately owned & that’s bad for democracy.
-
(Because, remember, that for every Milo you want to silence, there are a hundred religious fundamentalists who want to silence you.)
-
We will not win the war of ideas by silencing the ones we don’t like but by nurturing a commons where ideas can be freely debated.
-
(That said, freedom of speech does not imply a freedom to compel anyone to listen.)
-
I find your argument here a bit confusing. Surely a public sphere would not publish and advertise for anyone's ideas.
-
Exactly. And yet it would facilitate their expression and debate. Monopoly of centralised private platforms is the problem.
- 6 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.