Detailed journalism. Irrational dangerous people.
He began following a far-right website that trafficked in conspiracy theories about stolen elections and evil Democrats.
I find my distaste for censorship conflicting with my feeling that such sites should somehow not be allowed. Calling any group of people evil and saying they should be destroyed is instigation to violence. Frankly, if movie and record companies can, with a single request, have their content remove from websites, I should be allowed to remove content that quite literally puts my life and the lives of my loved ones in jeopardy.
I think this is a really important point.
We as a society, as a civilization, have to figure out free speech/unfettered inquiry versus disinformation/objectively falsified (or even weaponized) speech
Such sites existing are not the problem. The problem is the cultures that accept and even Foster such sites. Authoritarian ideologies, leninist or fascist. They rely on conspiracy-minded dogmatic rhetoric and propaganda to keep us divided and fighting.
How do you change that culture without eliminating the type of content that feeds that culture?
Education, fostering a culture of learning, merciles ridicule of any of that would reject it. There was a time that anyone screaming about the water turning the freaking frogs gay. Would only be seen standing on street corners smeared in their own shit as everyone shunned them. Not as an influential leader outside of small religious cults. You can never do away with them completely. But as a society we used to do much better about it. Boomers normalized it, us gen-x tolerated it, and it became a fact of life for millennials. Hopefully the Zoomers will finally start the push back the other direction. And those of us that are sane in the previous generations can show solidarity and support more than in that.
merciles ridicule
… only entrenches people in their positions
Especially for religious identity and other identity politics.
The way to flip such positions is to provide role models, people who are still clearly identified in the group, but who embrace – to the degree possible – tolerant liberal democratic evidence-based social structures.
“We are in a race between education and oblivion” -R B Fuller
Yep, anyone who rails against education as an enemy is definitionally not a good person or group. Here in the United States that has been conservatives for the past nearly 60 years, and this is all been normal.
TBF, there is a system in the US that tends to enforce mediocrity, spends a lot of money on bloated administration, and is both fearful of competition and willing to resort to politically dirty tricks to maintain their education monopoly.
I remember a Steve Jobs interview in Wired many years ago, he said his wish was for a group of energetic people graduating college to be able to start a school, just as readily as they could start a restaurant or a landscaping business – both of which, it should be pointed out, are regulated industries with licensing and safety standards.
There’s good reason it’s government administrated though. The competition model only works in urban environments. And even then. Those magnet schools etc are often just as big a part of the problem. Creating large disparities at best. Or a slightly more expensive failure mill on average.
There should be more leeway on a state by state basis to decide instruction methods etc. Provided they can satisfy core competencies. Part of the problem of the last 50 years is that we’ve let the most anti-education State set the standard for Education Nationwide simply because of their size.
Scary that people can be so twisted, he was apparently scary af even before the deeds. Ticking time bomb.
Archived at https://archive.is/Qo2uH
