Nobody's speech should be prioritised. I want Chelsea Manning to be able to speak as much as I want Count Dankula to not be sent to jail for his speech. You'll have to give me more examples of progressives being denied platforms.
But you didn't say GTA. You said "video games". But as you're going with that argument, could you show me how the satirical universe of the GTA games is ideologically the same as the incel or white supremacists movement, with the same goals?
-
-
Basically incel and white supremacy involve the ultimate goal of eradicating something. So what are
@RockstarGames trying to eradicate? -
So trying to eradicate something is bad? Should we ban the freedom of speech of marxists who call for the eradication of the capitalist class? Feminists who call for eradication of toxic men? Atheists who call for eradication of religion?
-
Your argument is confused. Yes, calling for genocide is bad? The eradication of ideas and ideology is fine. You can be against the tenets of Islam without wanting the genocide of Muslims, for example.
-
I'm saying that the mistreatment of the capitalist class under marxism is as equally as inevitable as the subjugation of ethnic minorities will be in Richard Spencer's ethnostate.
-
But if class is removed, then there would be no class. That's the flaw in your argument. As improbable as it is, there could be a removal of class systems without violence. There's a difference between class, a societal construct, and skin colour.
-
If we admit that gender is a social construct (which I think it is) do we then find it acceptable to eradicate trans people for being a gender we don't like?
-
I should point out, you're trying to make a point about freedom of expression and that a liberal market of ideas DOESN'T lead to violence, but also trying to point out the inevitability of certain ideologies lead to violence. It doesn't help your initial cause.
-
Freedom of speech is a pillar of society. Some ideologies are inherently violent. The marketplace of ideas is the reason we can keep ideologies from releasing their violent potential, otherwise the standard we set is repression. Read Mill's harm principle, it sums this up well
- 13 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
This isn't about ideology, it's about violence. I don't particularly care what someones ideology is however repugnant it is. It's not the same but the terminus of violence is supposedly the same. What about games like Ethnic Cleansing? You going to tell me theyre not ideological?
-
Goalposts moved again. Basically, a forum where people interact and swap violence and misogynistic ideas is not the same as a video game which has some of that content as part of its satirical make-up.
-
You're talking about -particular games- which make up part of that very movement whose freedom of speech you want to uphold. But you posited "video games" in relation to Christian values. There are video games with Christian values. So...
End of conversation
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.