> The idea that banning certain information will somehow result in it disappearing has been shown repeatedly to not work. A cursory reading of history should make this clear. You cannot turn the entire world into West Coast USA by banning everyone that disagrees with you. You’ll only create further echo chambers, both on your own platform and on the (new) platforms inevitably created by the exiled.
And in the process you’ll create a system that will eventually alienate enough people in the middle to undermine you. Banning discussion of this—instead of letting the courts do their work—will alienate the half of the country that voted for Trump. It’ll alienate traditional liberals for whom free speech (not in the narrow legal sense but the larger social sense) is a core value. And eventually the system you’ve created will do something to overreach. The desire to censor the other side won’t end here. And at that point, the majority of people will find themselves on the other side and you’ll have a problem.
Traditional liberal values were a good thing and we should hesitate to abandon them. Liberals defended nazis marching through American cities in the name of free speech. If we can handle that we can have handle baseless claims of election fraud that are being swiftly dealt with by the courts.
Speaking as an American who didn't vote for Trump, either time, you've certainly alienated me. You'd (collectively) best hope you're making more friends than enemies.
>Texas GOP chair says 'law-abiding states' should 'form a union' after SCOTUS rejects election suit
I feel there may be a real point to that. Is he being a bit emotional with his post? Sure. Should that be enough to write off a possible threat to democracy? No. I mean if that alienates you, I expect what the TX GOP chair did will REALLY make you passionate
Trump support is more about disillusionment and distrust of career politicians and frustration at the steady decline of blue-collar prosperity than it is about actually believing his mouth words.
And in the process you’ll create a system that will eventually alienate enough people in the middle to undermine you. Banning discussion of this—instead of letting the courts do their work—will alienate the half of the country that voted for Trump. It’ll alienate traditional liberals for whom free speech (not in the narrow legal sense but the larger social sense) is a core value. And eventually the system you’ve created will do something to overreach. The desire to censor the other side won’t end here. And at that point, the majority of people will find themselves on the other side and you’ll have a problem.
Traditional liberal values were a good thing and we should hesitate to abandon them. Liberals defended nazis marching through American cities in the name of free speech. If we can handle that we can have handle baseless claims of election fraud that are being swiftly dealt with by the courts.