The instance seems to be mostly right wing trolls. I know defederating is unpopular but I don’t think much is to be lost in this case and it can save the mods some headaches.
Edit: the response on exploding-heads.com to my reporting of transphobia. Courtesy of the “second in command”
You are correct. People having free ideas is never going to work if you want everyone to have the same ideas. That’s called fascism.
holy shit you have zero comprehension of politics at all, do you
“fascism is when people stop listening to you”, right next to “communism is when the government does stuff”
“Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, ultranationalist political ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation and race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy.”
Don’t try to misinterpret what I said. Censorship of opposing views is attacking someone’s right to free speech. Once again, you are correct, you don’t have to listen, but they have every right to say. I’m sorry that you truly believe that people that don’t like you should be censored. I don’t like them either, but censorship is a violation of their rights.
“But this isn’t a government entity!” No, its not, but that doesn’t mean I can’t argue for the right to free speech on here.
“Letting them have a platform will spread hate.” The right to hate is part of free speech. Just as you may hate, from what I can tell, republicans/people on the right, they can hate anyone else too. “Speech can be ugly, disgusting, hateful, prejudice, and alarming, but it can never be dangerous to a free society as long as men and women of good will have the freedom of speech to dispute it, challenge it, and reject it.”
As my final comment, because this comment chain has gone on for too long… the instance isn’t far-right or disgusting. All of the arguing of “They’re equal to nazi’s!” is an equivocation that resulted in an unrelated argument. They don’t have “hate speech”, just speech you hate. Anyway, I suggest that BOTH of us stop arguing on here. As good of a point as either one of us may have, I think its clear we’re cemented in our morals and are wasting our time. I encourage you to fight for what you believe in, and have a nice day.
not every place in the internet is America
That’s not what they’re saying but hey, go on defending bigots and their right to use all platforms they feel like using to convert people 🤷
Please explain to me what I misinterpreted so I can understand better. And yes, I will defend the rights of all who want to express their viewpoints.
They’re not saying everyone should have the same idea, they’re saying arguing with bigots leads to nothing because when they’re proven wrong instead of changing their mind they just double down and go further down the rabbit hole. The only way to prevent that is to just not let them take part in the discussion since they’re not mature or intelligent enough to do so.
What’s that old saying… “You can’t reason with somebody who is in a position they didn’t reason themselves into”. They’re not willing to change their minds or have a real discussion, the goalposts will just be moved time and time again when their hateful ideas are challenged.
exactly what I was trying to say
rationally reasoning with bigots rarely leads to bigots abandoning their bigotry; oftentimes it leads to them latching onto something else as an excuse or rationalization for their bigotry, doubling down out of spite, or outright violence