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.
-
-
Replying to @StephenArkley @angusmcdangus and
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.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @bowendesign @angusmcdangus and
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?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @StephenArkley @angusmcdangus and
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.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @bowendesign @angusmcdangus and
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
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @StephenArkley @angusmcdangus and
Freedom of "expression" is a pillar of UK society. I don't personally believe that any of what you argued really proves this point, in fact you've made a point of stating that you believe that violence is the inevitable end point of ideologies you stand against.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @bowendesign @StephenArkley and
If you platform or allow the platform of violent, hateful or harmful ideologies, there's plenty of proof (hence; incel terrorism, or even Islamic terrorism if you count the extremist forums of the 00's) leads to the spread and creation of adherents who could commit violent acts.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @bowendesign @angusmcdangus and
Yeah sure so let's censor racists so they can sneak under our nose and so we can never know what they actually believe until the point is too late. Let them go underground so they can create their own echochamber and avoid any refutation.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @StephenArkley @angusmcdangus and
But they do that anyway. They've done it for years. Societal norms even without censorship means they do this. Deplatforming people has worked - see Milo Yannapoulis' current state of destruction. The echochamber only expands with platforming, which they currently have.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @bowendesign @StephenArkley and
Unless you want to show me studies showing the complete opposite... I mean, we all know about Fox News, right? How does freedom of expression not just create a wider echochamber? I don't see any exchange of ideas when people self-ghettoise.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Freedom to post on incel reddit essentially meant an echochamber UNDER freedom of expression was created for those people. Knowing who those people are doesn't predicate our knowledge of which one will commit to violence. We're not living in Minority Report, after all.
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.