Mastodon and free speech (lemmy.sdf.org)

submitted 1 year ago by Milk_SDF_Possum@lemmy.sdf.org to c/mastodon@lemmy.ml

89 comments fedilink hide all child comments

This post is not only to try finding the best Mastodon instance/server but I also wanted to express about the Mastodon instances. Most of Mastodon servers are apparently harsh about other instances that include things they don't like and are quite serious about getting those Internet points putting how the place isn't welcome for "bigotry" and is for everyone and so diverse, and I wouldn't have any problems with this if this wasn't frequently used by people who will try to shut you if they disagree enough with you and will try to present themselves as so virtuous. You'd expect that the free side of the Internet would have people that value freedom and should let anything that isn't a crime or something that prejudice the instance itself or whatever space they're in but it seems this vision is getting far from the reality with time.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] whiskeypickle@lemmy.ml 14 points 1 year ago

Paradox of tolerance

The paradox of tolerance states that if a society is tolerant without limit, its ability to be tolerant is eventually seized or destroyed by the intolerant. Karl Popper described it as the seemingly self-contradictory idea that in order to maintain a tolerant society, the society must retain the right to be intolerant of intolerance.

[-] Milk_SDF_Possum@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 year ago

Mind you, the second half of the text is wrong (like unironically and objectively, despite I agreeing with the second half, contradicts the first half.

[-] dr_catman@beehaw.org 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

No it doesn’t. There is no contradiction there. You’re talking nonsense.

Do you know how Goebbels infamously described the Weimar Republic’s attitude towards the Nazi Party?

Essentially, if you’re not familiar, Goebbels was quoted as saying something along the lines of “I have no idea why they allowed us to exist in their system and take power. It should have been obvious that as soon as we gained power, we’d use that power to dismantle the system and ban the traditional parties from politics. Anyone with half a brain would have realized that and banned us first.” Then he cackled like a witch.

Ok I made up the part about the cackle.

[-] whiskeypickle@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago

in what way? if it's so wrong, it should be easy for you to prove, logically.

[-] Milk_SDF_Possum@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

First half is saying tolerance to the intolerant causes intolerance while the second half is saying intolerance to the intolerant causes intolerance. It is a writing error, I wasn't talking about the idea itself despite I disagreeing with it.

[-] whiskeypickle@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

that's not an error by the writer, that's an error in your understanding of the text and the meaning of the word "paradox".

[-] Milk_SDF_Possum@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 year ago

So he agrees with both statements? That makes him a paradox for agree with opposite ideas so.

[-] whiskeypickle@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 year ago

lol, no. of course not.

[-] Milk_SDF_Possum@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 year ago

I understand what the text tried to say and I disagree but I want to point out the writing itself is wrong and not the writer ideas. If you try to re-read the text you can notice the writing unintentionally implies different things despite being supposed to be the same.

[-] whiskeypickle@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago

I understand what the text tried

[X} DOUBT

but I want to point out the writing itself is wrong

incorrect. you simply fail to comprehend it. how unfortunate.

If you try to re-read the text you can notice the writing unintentionally implies different things despite being supposed to be the same.

you're seeing what you wish to.

[-] Milk_SDF_Possum@lemmy.sdf.org 0 points 1 year ago

If you insist to trying tricking yourself that I was exposing an idea and not pointing out the errors in the text composition, why didn't you just corrected the text and said you disagree to then go do your life things? I mean, it's easier to forcing yourself to not see the obvious.

[-] whiskeypickle@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

i find it much less likely that everyone who disagrees with you is wrong, and that you simply fail to grasp the clear logic of something that you happen to disagree with and choose to lash out at me with insults rather than to admit you were wrong.