LWDT VI: Kropotkin's Bread Dead Redemption.

[Greater Westralia]

If we censor Nazis and fascists, we ought to censor Stalinists, Maoists and other dictatorship-apologists.

Their rhetoric is a few steps down from Nazism but supports and enables violence nevertheless.

[Yusseria]

If we censor Nazis and fascists, we ought to censor Stalinists, Maoists and other dictatorship-apologists.

Their rhetoric is a few steps down from Nazism but supports and enables violence nevertheless.

Now, now. Mao may have killed 45 million people, but at least he wasn't a Nazi!

[LiberNovusAmericae]

That's why I mentioned it fam. Your past mistakes shall ever haunt you.


Censorship in general tends to be a hard sell, especially in places that like not being censored, like America. Besides that, censorship is a dangerous road to go down, and not worth the risk. Especially not for any type of "libertarian" where a nebulous entity having the ability to silence others is generally frowned upon.

Given that plenty of Western democracies have implemented hate speech laws and have yet to descend into Stalinist repression, this borders on a slippery slope fallacy.

It doesn't have to so down to Stalinist levels of oppression to be problematic. Under the UK's hate speech laws, YouTuber Count Dankula got arrested over a stupid joke.

[Torrocca]

If we censor Nazis and fascists, we ought to censor Stalinists, Maoists and other dictatorship-apologists.

Their rhetoric is a few steps down from Nazism but supports and enables violence nevertheless.

Supporting violence itself isn't and most definitely shouldn't be censored. Not all violence is created equally, and not all violence is done to further the goals of an authoritarian or a genocidal regime.

I'm not against censoring authoritarianism, though; the paradox of intolerance is a real thing, and I'm okay with it if it ultimately means preserving actual liberty.

[Proctopeo]

That's why I mentioned it fam. Your past mistakes shall ever haunt you.

Please stop.

Pa gen okenn.

Censorship in general tends to be a hard sell, especially in places that like not being censored, like America. Besides that, censorship is a dangerous road to go down, and not worth the risk. Especially not for any type of "libertarian" where a nebulous entity having the ability to silence others is generally frowned upon.

I'm pretty certain that censoring Nazism is a thing most leftists can comfortably agree on.

Left-"libertarians" and literal Stalinists make weird bedfellows when it comes to suppressing an ideology.

You'll be happy to hear I don't advocate for the suppression of any leftist ideology, just the development of a stigma against the extreme ones

Given that plenty of Western democracies have implemented hate speech laws and have yet to descend into Stalinist repression, this borders on a slippery slope fallacy.

Cool, but I never mentioned Stalin or Stalinism.
Only that the ability to silence others is generally frowned upon. Doesn't mean Western democracies haven't been idiots, and that it won't bite them in the ass in the future.

"Everyone who disagrees with me just refuses to see the obvious objective reality!"

But I'll bite, what's the "evident difference."

Defending implies a degree of sympathy and support. Permission implies tolerance, which itself doesn't in any way imply sympathy or support. It's that simple.

Given that plenty of Western democracies have implemented hate speech laws and have yet to descend into Stalinist repression, this borders on a slippery slope fallacy.

It doesn't have to so down to Stalinist levels of oppression to be problematic. Under the UK's hate speech laws, YouTuber Count Dankula got arrested over a stupid joke.

He was clearly training that pug to be the next Hitler, you crypto-Nazi! /s

[Pasong Tirad]

If we censor Nazis and fascists, we ought to censor Stalinists, Maoists and other dictatorship-apologists.

Their rhetoric is a few steps down from Nazism but supports and enables violence nevertheless.

Fuck yeah, censor authoritarians.

[Torrocca]

I'm pretty certain that censoring Nazism is a thing most leftists can comfortably agree on.

Left-"libertarians" and literal Stalinists make weird bedfellows when it comes to suppressing an ideology.

You'll be happy to hear I don't advocate for the suppression of any leftist ideology, just the development of a stigma against the extreme ones

It's the paradox of intolerance, famalam. There's no problem with suppressing authoritarianism (including Stalinists, of course, since you have an odd fascination with trying to lump us in with them) to preserve liberty.

[Yusseria]

If we censor Nazis and fascists, we ought to censor Stalinists, Maoists and other dictatorship-apologists.

Their rhetoric is a few steps down from Nazism but supports and enables violence nevertheless.

Fuck yeah, censor authoritarians.

God, the irony.

[Greater Westralia]

Supporting violence itself isn't and most definitely shouldn't be censored. Not all violence is created equally, and not all violence is done to further the goals of an authoritarian or a genocidal regime.

I'm not against censoring authoritarianism, though; the paradox of intolerance is a real thing, and I'm okay with it if it ultimately means preserving actual liberty.

See, I'm disappointed. I thought you libertarian socialists could be relied to rail against the excesses of revolutionary Marxist-Leninist state, but when the chips fall down all you care about is killing the bourgeoisie.

[LiberNovusAmericae]

If we censor Nazis and fascists, we ought to censor Stalinists, Maoists and other dictatorship-apologists.

Their rhetoric is a few steps down from Nazism but supports and enables violence nevertheless.

Fuck yeah, censor authoritarians.

At least you're principled in that regard.

[Proctopeo]

Left-"libertarians" and literal Stalinists make weird bedfellows when it comes to suppressing an ideology.

You'll be happy to hear I don't advocate for the suppression of any leftist ideology, just the development of a stigma against the extreme ones

It's the paradox of intolerance, famalam. There's no problem with suppressing authoritarianism to preserve liberty.

I mean, sure, but if I went with that line of thinking I'd have to suppress you too.
As much fun as that might be you're more useful alive and free than alive and in a political prison.

[Crysuko]

I'm sorry to be steryotypical but I have 0, absolute 0 qualms about rightists of any flavour being de-platformed, silenced and made to feel afraid.

[Pasong Tirad]

Fuck yeah, censor authoritarians.

God, the irony.

It's the paradox of intolerance, famalam. There's no problem with suppressing authoritarianism (including Stalinists, of course, since you have an odd fascination with trying to lump us in with them) to preserve liberty.

[Lamoni]

Yes! Brexit and the right winning in the Netherlands is only the beginning. The dawn of a right wing sweep and new order across Europe and the wider western world is coming and soon!

So what you're saying is we have to shoot a bunch of Nazis all over again?

What the hell, I'm game.

How about we NOT go down the road of advocating death, shall we?

[Torrocca]

Supporting violence itself isn't and most definitely shouldn't be censored. Not all violence is created equally, and not all violence is done to further the goals of an authoritarian or a genocidal regime.

I'm not against censoring authoritarianism, though; the paradox of intolerance is a real thing, and I'm okay with it if it ultimately means preserving actual liberty.

See, I'm disappointed. I thought you libertarian socialists could be relied to rail against the excesses of revolutionary Marxist-Leninist state, but when the chips fall down all you care about is killing the bourgeoisie.

Literally what lmao

TIL'd not tolerating intolerance = "LET'S SHOOT SOME BOURGIES WOO I LOVE YOU STALIN"

[Yusseria]

God, the irony.

It's the paradox of intolerance, famalam. There's no problem with suppressing authoritarianism (including Stalinists, of course, since you have an odd fascination with trying to lump us in with them) to preserve liberty.

Censorship is an inherently authoritarian tactic. You're literally using authoritarianism to shut down authoritarians, yet you lack the self-awareness to realize this.

[Torrocca]

Censorship is an inherently authoritarian tactic. You're literally using authoritarianism to shut down authoritarians, yet you lack the self-awareness to realize this.

Fam, there's a reason it's called the PARADOX of Intolerance.

[Torrocca]

It's the paradox of intolerance, famalam. There's no problem with suppressing authoritarianism to preserve liberty.

I mean, sure, but if I went with that line of thinking I'd have to suppress you too.
As much fun as that might be you're more useful alive and free than alive and in a political prison.

Ah, yeah, because I'm totally an authoritarian douchebag with a hinge for genociding kulaks and shit.

[Crysuko]

Censorship is an inherently authoritarian tactic. You're literally using authoritarianism to shut down authoritarians, yet you lack the self-awareness to realize this.

you can use a scalpel to remove a tumour and cut a throat. same tool, different procedures.

[Yusseria]

Censorship is an inherently authoritarian tactic. You're literally using authoritarianism to shut down authoritarians, yet you lack the self-awareness to realize this.

Fam, there's a reason it's called the PARADOX of Intolerance.

Yeah, I know there's a reason you decided to make that up.

[Greater Westralia]

Literally what lmao

TIL'd not tolerating intolerance = "LET'S SHOOT SOME BOURGIES WOO I LOVE YOU STALIN"

Yeah, I really misread your statement, sorry for that.

But lets be honest, that's what you really want.

[Yusseria]

Censorship is an inherently authoritarian tactic. You're literally using authoritarianism to shut down authoritarians, yet you lack the self-awareness to realize this.

you can use a scalpel to remove a tumour and cut a throat. same tool, different procedures.

The end result here is the same. You're still shutting down certain people's free speech because of their beliefs, which is inherently authoritarian.

If you're so uncomfortable with admitting this then perhaps you need to reevaluate your beliefs.

[Torrocca]

Fam, there's a reason it's called the PARADOX of Intolerance.

Yeah, I know there's a reason you decided to make that up.

Nah. I only fidged the "tolerance" part, which is what it really is called.

Literally what lmao

TIL'd not tolerating intolerance = "LET'S SHOOT SOME BOURGIES WOO I LOVE YOU STALIN"

Yeah, I really misread your statement, sorry for that.

But lets be honest, that's what you really want.

No, actually.

[Crysuko]

Literally what lmao

TIL'd not tolerating intolerance = "LET'S SHOOT SOME BOURGIES WOO I LOVE YOU STALIN"

Yeah, I really misread your statement, sorry for that.

But lets be honest, that's what you really want.

I (at least) don't believe in mass murder, and going around ending lives at random (regardless of who they are) is not what could be called revolutionary praxis.

[Pasong Tirad]

Fam, there's a reason it's called the PARADOX of Intolerance.

Yeah, I know there's a reason you decided to make that up.

You can literally just Google this. It's not that hard.