mr_engineer

For example?!

Erasing words from a computer-screen does nothing except silence those who wrote it and make those who missed it more curious about it, look for it elsewhere and not trust the person in favor of censoring it. It also makes people very suspicious of you, that you're trying to hide something from them. It's very, very counter-productive. I'm willing to entertain that censorship has a time and a place. By all means, censor people who make threats. What I'm not for, is inventing scapegoats and censoring people just for the heck of it. Cancelling people pre-emptively, because you don't like their style, because they remind you of someone who did something bad. Or, because you don't like their politics. This is classic mob-mentality. The function of the government is to suppress ideas which would destroy government. Not ideas that would harm masses of people! In fact, they are quite willing to harm masses of people if it benefits them. (For example, the Iraq-war) That's the reality of politicians. These are really dirty and corrupt people who will do absolutely anything for power. Speaking the woke language does not make them an exception at all. For example, BLM-riots, lockdowns destroying businesses, coercion into injecting a vaccine that was developed oddly fast, etc.

In the short-term, it's easier to limit hate-speech. But, it's a cope. Not the solution. And, don't give me this crap that the point of this 'performance of wokeness' is actually for the betterment of society. As if you give a damn. It's all about virtue-signalling anyways. Let's not kid ourselves here. The actual solution is to stop making economic-inequality such a huge political trigger for people. And, the way you do that is that all people in charge of education start to enable students to follow their passion. When we have more people doing that, they're too busy doing their own thing that makes them happy, so they don't have time to care about status or 'disrespect from the upper-class' or things like that. Then, politicians can't radicalize them. Focus on empowering people, not on taking advantage of their perceived victimhood due to what happened in history. And don't rely on government to do absolutely everything for you. Get your ass up and do something for society yourself, if you care that much.

It starts with them owning their lives and being held accountable for getting influenced by the 'bad influences'. You cannot brute-force 'good influences' onto them and expect this to happen, you cannot brow-beat them into doing better. You have to first understand what's appealing to them, you have to create a better solution for them and then you have to communicate to them in a way that wakes them up to the reality that they're choosing to be influenced and they can make a different choice, a better choice. And, it has to look better to their eyes. This is one of the primary reasons the West fails to install democracy in Afghanistan and Syria. Instead of getting local support and making sense of the ground-level situation there, they carpet-bomb the hell out of the place first and then put billions into installing their own infrastructure there! Doesn't work in the end.

@Consept It is very important that we wake up to our epistemic-power and take ownership of what we believe. Honestly, that's the only solution to the problems you're mentioning. On all of the issues you mentioned, gangs, terrorism, etc. These people are not consciously thinking about what they're doing and the consequences of it. When they do and they see crying families as a result of it, they leave! This ideology that 'young people are susceptible to bad influences' puts them in a disempowered position relative to their own minds. Your industry may benefit from believing thus, cuz now, you have an enemy to fight out there. But, I'd much rather you focus on helping the individuals build a decent life. Through good role-modelling. And this starts by them owning their minds.

Yeah, but if you have a good relationship with the middle-class and aren't taxing them too much for the sake of the homeless, they can help integrate the homeless more, if you involve them voluntarily in initiatives that cater to the middle-class ego, like charity-work/NGO-work. The problem isn't the homophobia, then. It's the murder, right?! And you gotta look into that individual's past to figure out why they did it. And address something more serious that's behind it, like, say, the economic-instability. This is what the police is supposed to do, ideally. For every one homophobe that commits a murder, there's hundreds, thousands that don't. And, when you make homophobia itself a taboo, you never solve it. And, the problems LGBT people face don't get solved, they get worse.

Physics.

I have 4-5 students that I teach for a living.

That's kinda insulting to the psychologically developed people. And, it's inefficient to dismiss the value they have to offer to you in solving the problems. I do know that. Your interpretation of a 'dangerous ideology' is entirely your choice. By your logic, if you start following the Taliban on Twitter, you'll get radicalized by them and you're a potentially dangerous individual. Whether you tune into Twitter everyday or once a month.

5-10 people. On this thread.

Yeah. I'm working with people here right now!

Your question makes untrue assumptions. I'm trying to draw your attention to that. Because the link between thoughts and emotions is different for every individual. Same goes for the link between emotions and actions. And, when you get down to it, not all of those actions are dangerous. You have to solve this on an individual level, by understanding what they need.

There's no such thing as a 'dangerous ideology'. It's not the ideology itself that's dangerous, that's just words. It's what people make it mean and it's what they do with it. It's actions that are dangerous, not ideologies. For that matter, woke people support taking away people's body-sovereignty in response to a pandemic. Does this mean that I'm gonna classify woke ideology as a 'dangerous ideology'?! I could, by your logic. But, I won't, cuz I see that it's not the ideas that are dangerous, it's the actions.

I don't like classifying people as 'vulnerable'. The whole point I was making earlier is that people have their agendas and they choose to believe certain things based on that. I believe in respecting people's intellectual sovereignty and not in 'protecting them from dangerous ideas'. You almost understood my solution. The detail you missed, is that when you create your propaganda, you don't just look at the BS in the opposing side's propaganda. You integrate the kernel of truth in their propaganda, so that you get to capture their audience. This is not being done today. And I believe that this is the long-term solution.

Fine, then. They're going to go to alt-media/fringe sources and post there. You happy with that?! This is just how the world works, don't complain about it. Right?! Wrong. The mainstream doesn't support it. And, they have a communist woke agenda to silence everyone who disagrees with them. I see it all, thanks for the concern. This is exactly what I'd say to the woke mob. Says the guy with the anime profile pic.

I don't believe in fundamentalism. I'm happy to have that show in my writing. I'll take that as a compliment. Thanks!

@Consept The only thing I will tell you is this - the human brain is not this simple computer-like thing, that's programmable. A human being is a living, conscious being with personal motivations and goals. A human being forms their own worldview, their own interpretations. And, they have their own reasons for behaving a certain way. So, it's not that if some random person with a radical ideology comes along, two humans listening to it are going to respond the same way. They're going to respond very differently! To further illustrate my point, let's say an alcoholic abusive father has two sons. One son will become an alcoholic like his father, the other son will develop a vehement hatred towards alcohol and will never touch it. Common scenario. The education-system wrongly believes that 'knowledge is words', that 'the map is the territory'. It is not. And, people's behavior can be controlled and predicted based on what's being indoctrinated into them. This is because generally, if you educate someone with certain knowledge and put them in a job with a certain job-description, they will do a similar job. This is not true with 'knowledge' that's more subjective, like morality. Simply because our mental-associations on this front aren't with a material reality, they're with how we feel about something. Which depends on personal motivation. Now, how do we solve the problem of radicalization?! Here's how - the people propagating the radical ideology have a certain niche. They have that position in that niche, precisely because there is a kernel of truth in what they're saying. The solution to this problem is to integrate that kernel of truth and to then out-compete them. Someone who understands what they're saying and disagrees with the dysfunctional aspects of what they're doing, needs to step up and out-compete them in that niche. Brute-force repression doesn't work, it worsens the issue.

This is benevolent racism. That they're a 'protected class', that they're fundamentally inferior to white people, which is why they have to be 'protected'. That they can't protect themselves, that they don't have that self-respect. This paradoxically drives home the idea that maybe they are sub-human...? Also, don't forget the issue of black people dehumanizing and demonizing white people as a group of people, stereotyping them as racist. This is the real issue right now. This also fuels black people's racism! By discriminating between groups of people and dividing and ruling them...?

I'm not banned because I'm telling the truth. Why is 'basic human decency' a necessity to not be cancelled?! Why can't people who agree on their standards of decency congregate together and live peacefully with each other, without imposing their moral standards onto others?! The principle of 'agree to disagree' is something at Stage Orange that the woke mob has not integrated or understood. The point of doing that is to live together and work together, without slitting each other's throats, like Stage Blue fundamentalists would. That's what wokeness is turning into, honestly. Fundamentalism. A government is not supposed to be idealizing how people behave and holding people to idealized standards. They're supposed to hold a bare minimum standard of decency, which is so bare minimum that if it's above the legal line, it's fine. If it doesn't physically hurt someone, it's fine. Government is not supposed to get involved in 'emotional-safety' and 'protecting each other from insults' and stuff. This is something that individuals should be able to protect themselves against. It's your own responsibility to do this! Practically, this is very simple. If you're a Black person, the solution to racism is not to go cancel racists. It's to not mess with racists, not feed racist trolls. You know why?! Because there is an abundance of decent people on the planet, who aren't racist. So, it's not smart, to go find the one racist person and to mess with them. It's a basic principle of solving the problem of evil in the world - the more you resist it, the stronger it gets. Precisely because, it's an illusion.

Nice deflection.

Right. Tomorrow, saying that 'not all women are angels' is going to be a crime, too, I guess. Of 'misogyny'. We're almost there, in fact. Congratulations. In fact, why have an opinion at all?! Make that a crime too! You are under arrest for having this opinion. What did it do?! Oh, nothing, it made our safe-space impure with your vile ideas. We're already making leaving your house a crime and breathing freely a crime. And expressing yourself online a crime. What next? Is thinking the wrong thoughts also going to be a crime?! Is walking on two legs also going to be a crime?! What is the agenda of the woke mob here?!

This is what the woke people sound like when they enforce lockdowns and the jab. And when they talk about 'conspiracy-theorists'. 'Those of you who leave their houses tonight will be prosecuted as a terrorist without leniency or exception'.

Yes. Yes. Actions speak louder than words. Don't make assumptions about people just because they talk shit. The woke mob forgets about 'innocent until proven guilty'. Yes. The 'right-wing' is not a monolith. Nor is the anti-woke vision. The issue with wokeness is precisely this. It turns everything into a monolith, because it is one. This is a recipe for communist authoritarianism.

First of all, we have to stop assuming that we're so much better than the other side. We have a lot of work to do on ourselves, on simply embodying integrity. This will solve the problem of virtue-signalling and make us humbler. Next, go deeper into the reasons behind why conservatives hold onto the systems they hold onto. No, it's not just selfishness. Stage Blue makes a big enemy of that, in fact. There are genuine benefits to those systems that must be acknowledged. Leo does a very good job of that in his steel-manned version of conservatism. Next, we have to come up with creative solutions to the problems that these systems solve, that are better than the existing systems. For example, if the single-family household exists so that parents take responsibility for their children, but now we have scientific methods like DNA-tests that help us do that. So, we can transition to an intentional-community system that's more economically viable and that'll also solve problems like loneliness and emotional-starvation. This will require us to pass through Green and work on our relationships and our mental-health and use that knowledge to connect, not to separate. And then, if you want to do something about the problems created by conservatives, make more efficient systems than theirs and out-compete them in an otherwise free market. This will get us out of the victim-mentality and into action-mode. Each and every one of us is responsible for the system we inhabit. Not just our position in it, the system itself. The 'oppressed' people don't seem to realize their role in creating the system that oppresses them. It's very important to first wake up to this and then use that empowerment to change the system for the better. Not to 'fight for empowerment'.

I said, I pay attention to what people mean by what they say, how they implement what they say. You need a better attention-span.