foxnews.com/politics/2016/11 … o-gab.html
A social media network similar to Twitter has been set up, but this is set up on the premise of freedom of speech and love of the human spirit, instead of Sado-Erotic banning of those who moderators don’t agree with.
The intellectual repression of the last eight years coincides with the widespread access to the internet, yet many have found the ability to reach out and communicate very limited, by foul minded moderators. I’m not a fan of the so called Alt-Right, but they are one example of people who were needlessly antagonized from simply being able to speak their minds for years.
The effect of individuals like Only Humean and Nagsj, with oppressive acts if banning, and hiding threads is well known; what effect will this new found emphasis on freedom of thought have on the future of philosophy forums, and philosophy itself? Currently, it it painted as racist or dirty, but in the future it seems that it can only become more inclusive and supportive of minority views, some of which will be given the chance of becoming majority views in the realm of the free comprehension of ideas. I’m not certain what the virtue of having blantant hate nazis persecuting free speech is for a democracy- what makes sense for North Korea’s internet doesn’t make sense for western democracies that are supposed to support freedom of expression, in the believe that increased dialogue and individual self awareness of personal priorities will cause a educated population to reject the bad ideas while rejecting the worst. Look at Fixed Cross, only one misfit on the forum ever embraced his ideas, most refuse them. It is a example that healthy dialogue can work, his ideas are seen as a largely sterile mockery of philosophy- but if we banned him, he would appear as a revolutionary martyr. Since he is not, he can’t even take himself seriously anymore. That’s the power of Freedom of Speech (and Canada’s winter).