Jordan Peterson on why you shouldn't regulate hate speech.

submitted by Canbot from files.catbox.moe

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Canbot[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

imprison the people who spread poison and indecency as it is understood by the majority of people, and not vocal, tyrannical minority.

The vocal minority implies a grass roots movement of political activists. That is an illusion created by (((those in power))) to deflect responsibility. The opinions of the majority don't matter. The opinions of small political groups don't matter. The pro white movement can get as loud and active as they want and they will never get hate speech laws or rules to protect white people.

The only people who decide what is considered hate speech are (((those in power))). All we can do is demand that they define the rules. That will take a tiny bit of thier power away.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Yeah by vocal minority I meant (((those in power))) and those empowered by them.

The opinions of the majority don't matter.

All we can do is demand that they define the rules. That will take a tiny bit of thier power away.

If people are unorganized, then yes, their opinion indeed doesn't matter. Not necessarily will that that take away their power though, with better definitions you can stay at neutral position at best, going around definitions will always be a thing. The best thing you can do is political organization.

[–]Canbot[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You need a nucleation point to organize people. Forcing (((them))) to contradict thier own definitions makes thier abuse more obvious and allows criticism, dissent, and ultimately a rallying point.