> Restrictions on speech always begin by something that many will argue is sensible, then they start growing into what boils down to totalitarianism.
May I introduce you to the Paradox of Tolerance, formulated by the Austrian Karl Popper after seeing the rise of Nazism?
> Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them.
> In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most unwise.
> But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant.
"When our enemies say: 'but we gave you freedom of thought before' - yeah, you did! That doesn't mean we should do the same for you! Your stupidity shall not be contagious! That you gave it to us is proof of how dumb you are!"
Of course I did get the point and I disagree. There’s a difference between allowing people to say bad things and allowing the same people to restrict the speech of others. How about we do the former without the latter?
No it doesn’t. Quoting the part of the Quran that says that Muhammad fucked a nine year old child doesn’t automatically lead to totalitarianism. Restricting the right of people from claiming that IS totalitarian though.
I also want to add that I didn’t flag your comments and I support your right to express yourself fully.
(Read the article: “disparaging” means quoting what the Quran says about what Muhammad did)
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/10/its-not-fr...
Restrictions on speech always begin by something that many will argue is sensible, then they start growing into what boils down to totalitarianism.