In FB's case, doing the right thing will only drive holocaust deniers further underground. Banishment is not the way people should debate ideas, however stupid they are.
Specially when they are stupid ones.
back
1 comments
underground and marginalized is exactly where that conversation should be taking place. not on the open forums of one of the most trafficked web sites on the planet.
it is one thing to have a conversation and/or debate as to the veracity of the holocaust. it is another to actually form groups as a hub specifically for the sole purpose of denying what is an immutable fact. in doing so, fb lends itself as an unwitting accomplice and creates an implied link between the two.
how bad can holocaust denial be?sounds like they might have a point. you can join a group for it right on facebook!
What about when it's our unpopular idea, siculars? Ten to fifteen years ago, when it was common knowledge that hackers were just criminals that broke into computers and stole things, should we have had to have these conversations underground and marginalized?
When you call for suppression, you're asserting that you expect to be on the winning side of every memetic battle, but the only way to assure that is to switch sides if you're losing.
Ideally we would debate openly and ideas would stand/fall on their merits alone. However, this takes near herculean mental efforts on the parts of all involved to overcome their base, political instincts. And unfortunately you lose politically if you engage with dramatically unpopular ideas in any way:
http://www.overcomingbias.com/2009/04/in-the-latest-american...
The conflagration between hacker and cracker was and remains semantics. Sir, your argument is sound but your example is weak.
I knew it was weak, but it was the only point of reference I had that I knew we shared, without reading through your comment history.
I think you mean "conflation", by the way.
I meant what I wrote. Conflagration it is.