Discussion about this post

User's avatar
KSC Hatch's avatar

"Open debate only is useful when everyone debating agrees on the premise. "

This, this, this, this, THIS!

I can't help noticing two things about the "open debate" conversations:

1. It's always being upheld by people with the least skin in the game. I recently saw a post that read: Some of you have never had to fight for your human rights, and it shows. Both-siding/all-siding conversations about human rights is a real tell that you have never had to fight for yours.

2. It's like none of the open debate folks have ever encountered the tolerance paradox, or if they have it's been so surface level they have never taken it to it's conclusion which is that we must never tolerate intolerance of human lives and embodiments. People who refuse to censor hate speech seem to think all speech is created equal and therefore intolerance of the opinions of Nazis is the same as intolerance of a difference of opinion about a movie. These false equivalencies are dangerous and willfully ignorant of systemic oppression.

Anyway - I'm ignoring the hellscape of Notes and sticking with the newsletter blog part of the platform.

Expand full comment
9 more comments...

No posts