Because they only talk to their in groups they have no one to contest their ideas. And so both sides get polarised. Normally this would not be an issue. Since radicals usally form a minority of the left or the right. On top of that democratic countries have free speech. And free speech is how western civilization stays democratic and civil. Part 2
Radical ideas can't survive free speech. Because when you let a radical talk an average person will recognise how insane they are. When you try to suppres the idea using bans it festers. It grows from the underground where it thrives until it pops out and that is when people start dying. Part 3
If you do not talk the only way to solve issues would be using violence. Belive me there are a lot of people waiting for just that. It would get real bloody real fast. Part 4
This is our most urgent problem. The left and right is getting polarised. Free speech is dying in universities. On the premise of 'equality' the humanities departments are indoctrination camps. And it is slowly creeping towards STEM fields.
The thought police is coming
Beware. Part 5
I totally agree about the radicalization preventing any dialogue and how most radicals who engage in dogmatic politics are usually too closed minded to actually be of use to the political ecosystem. I disagree about free speech "dying" in universities...
Free speech was choked from universities LONG time ago. Remember when protests at universities were nationwide and epidemic? What was going on at that time? Hate crimes originating from the abuse of "free speech", which empowered radicals on both sides to start an ideological war,
I'm not saying that free speech as an ideal to strive for is bad, but when you accompany total freedom of speech and the lack of actual critical thinking education, it really does ntohing but turn politics into a bully pulpit
Also, when many people complain about free speech being censored, they often use it in the context of societal shunning resulting from their use of free speech, which in no way is impeding anyones' rights. Free Speech just means the government cant do shit
and in that sense, imo free speech has long been stifled under the oligarchy of the media owners. Who controls the dialogue by feeding people this crap that causes polarization and encourages radicalization?
instead of helping to direct public attention towards meaningful debates and actual dissections of issues to make better policies, they simply abuse psychology to keep people hooked on the latest and greatest irrational fear conveyor in the name of the 24 hours news cycle
shoot now that i typed it out I'm missing a piece of my argument. regarding universities stamping out free speech long time ago, the racial tensions were part of the reason for the censoring of free speech in schools from that long time ago. You stop people from printing inflammatory bullshit about other people, you stop rampant aggression and over-defensiveness.
it's not a long term solution by any means : just like how civil liberties tare taken away by the president in times of emergency (aka lincoln), free speech too should every once in awhile be curbed. The American public should and does claw back their rights after each of these crisis-es are resolved. So I have no issue about people wanting free speech back, like how we do with civil liberties
but there is so much misinformation on what constitutes free speech and adding in all of these dogmatic screaming matches, and all of a sudden we lose direction and perspective
Professors getting fired because they do not agree with the radical left. Staff forcibly going through unconscious bias training even though it effects nothing.
Attacking speakers using violent force and drowning out the talker with white noise. And so much more. I will post links soon.
Even before a few years ago, universities quite often cancelled speeches. Cancelling because of the chance of negative publicity is nothing new. It's the same reason game developers try to pander to extreme feminists so they don't get publicly shit on. But here's the thing.... who is giving these extreme feminist the legitimacy to represent all feminists in order to pressure these people?
THE PEOPLE GIVING THESE IDIOTS ATTENTION! The same people who dig up these videos showcasing the extreme examples are the same ones giving them power to pull this sort of shit. If these extreme feminists were laughed at as a joke, no one would take them seriously....This is the same reason PETA is still a thing and people associate it with animal rights when they're more of an animal reaper.
So what's the issue again? people giving legitimacy to extremists by taking them seriously and giving them publicity. The media who frames issues with certain perspectives so that people are blinded to the possibilities of the questions the media is even asking could be based in bullshit. Who empowers media to pull this bullshit on us? Close minded non-critical thinkers who only think with their feelings.
btw I'm not denying anything you're saying in terms of terrible things resulting from the radical left throwing temper tantrums and bullying people in the name of their causes. I'm simply saying that they themselves aren't the root of the problem
There will ALWAYS be extremists ideologically. There will always be the ends of the bell curve. But a well functioning society can quell bullshit by simply ignoring or laughing at radical ideologues, and should, because reality cannot be based on ideology.
That is not the issue. As i mentioned before. When you allow people to speak you allow them to think about it.
Because when people 'think' you are only reaffirming your beliefs. Real thinking is hard because you have to have a neutral debate inside your head which is near impossible to do.
You do not straight up legislate morality because of this : human error, human wearkness, etc. all laws are designed with the effort of minimizing these problems. But no matter how much you prepare from the top down for human weaknesses, if enough people simpy ignore these precautions because it's not aligned with thier experiences, you get insanity
When you talk you don't have to have a debate in your head. You can say your idea which is probably wrong cause you are an idiot (not you specifically everyone)
So other people come and tell you why your idea is idiotic and why you are stupid. And you retort you send an argument back and hopefully both of you can get out of this argument a little less stupid than before.
I think I now get what you mean. You feel like the left has overtaken academia to a point where there won't be free thought from individuals because there is a lack of free speech. (next part coming in a bit, organizing in my head)
Just as a quick personal story though, my philo 101 teacher was an official Communist party member. Of America. The only way his party affiliation affected the class was an hour of discussion on the topic and one question on the final. His main teaching style? Playing the devils' advocate to force people to think.
he openly told people that the more people talked on the subjects in class, the better of a buffer their grades would get, because his goal was to force critical thought by engaging students. I know it's just one example, but since you like examples, thought you'd appreciate that.
You are right in a sense : similarly when you force a racist and someone of the race he hates to sit down and have a long talk, most of the time it's no longer a racist who is walking away from that. This has been a commonly documented experience
The problem is that in order for speech to translate to thought, you need a degree of open mindedness. Not a lot even. Just a bit. Just enough to let you translate your experiences talking out your thoughts and feelings while allowing you to absorb others'.
This is relatively common and easy to do in a one vs one setting. However, the moment you get more people involved, people immediately feel defensive. What do people do when they feel defensive? double down on the close mindedness
what you are sayin about the extreme left's bullshit hurting the conversation is absolutely correct. Their aggression and victim-playing easily causes lots of people to get defensive. As they say, what's the best way to create a racist? call someone one.
And yes, this is the exact same reason the "alt right" has the same effect on anyone leaning left at all. This is the reason for the continuing polarization. Constant lashing out due to feelings of defensiveness due to feelings of being attacked
when it's one on one, it's much easier to see the other person as an actual person rather than someone out to get you or an attacker. Similarly to how extremism in Islam is excused with a "jihad against the infidels", the easiest way to trick gullible defensive people into an agenda is through fear
Then we demonize the "other side". This is what tribalism is. This is natural human tendencies. But this is also something we must move on as a society in order to advance civilization
this defensiveness btw, also happens when conservatives enter a college that they feel is "attacking" them or their ideology. So yes, in a sense, extreme leftist voice being megaphoned over society is causing extremism by cause even more non-libs to get "triggered" in college.
However, you don't get any better results by forcing moderatism (is that a word?) down peoples' throats either. I'm a left leaning moderate simply because realistically that's where you have the best chance of slowly moving society to a better place for everyone (i feel anyways).
if extremists both get super defensive, they'll only go underground and get even more cancerous. Just look at VPNs' main usage : child porn. Why is most of the dark net child porn? probably because therapists are required BY LAW to report anyone confessing an attraction to minors
they cultivate a culture of homemade child porn in the deep recesses of the dark web... Just take that in for a minute. That's what happens when you don't let extremists vent out in public and suppress them
There really is no easy answer because there are so many interlocking factors. Long term, yes free speech in education = people learning. Many short term issues can pop up though where we may need to sacrifice the personal development of a generation to stop things like racial warfare. (i'm exaggerating but you get my gist)
The main thing that I apply this to in my life is to try to open up people's minds and loosen their defensiveness in the people in my life. I know the chance of me affecting something on a national scale is nil. But since they are the people in my life, I can help them since they trust me, and maybe they can apply it to people in theirs.
There may not be a short term answer to this ongoing overreaction from defensiveness but I truly believe in the long term, if other people who aren't blinded by partisanship do the same, we can slowly change the landscape of our world (done)
Comments on Profile Post by doomeye1337