Hacker News Reader

Comment by okket | Hacker News Reader

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance#Tolerance...

In other words, mental gymnastics to justify that your opponents are morally wrong and you're right, and because they're wrong, I have every right to stop them by any means necessary.

It makes perfect sense. If you create tools to ban certain types of speech, say intolerance of homophobia, what happens when a homophobe acquires those tools?

Because any tool will be eventually misused and abused.

What "tools" do you need to "create" to "ban certain types of speech"? What does that even mean?

You don't need tools to kick nazis off your platform. And who cares what homophobes do on their platforms? Don't use them.

Laws and practices that help you exclude certain opinions.

Like for example in this case the Mozilla Acceptable Use Policy. Change a few words, add some statements, and it can be used against Antifa.

Homophobes were just an example, you can substitute with Nazis or others.

Then don't change it.

When you start summoning demons, you don't always get to choose who the demon decides to eat... Oh, you might get to point it in the direction of your enemies to begin with, sure. But eventually it'll start eating people you like, and by that point it'll have grown far too large to control.

You don't even need to change anything. The article already mentions promoting violence was one of the reasons.

So yes, the whole point of Antifa is already unacceptable by that policy.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com