this post was submitted on 15 Feb 2022
2 points (100.0% liked)
Asklemmy
44672 readers
1025 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- [email protected]: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Yes. But that's what you want, to suppress freedom of speech. I think I can explain...
If you said "will I be picking my nose if I root around in my nostril with a finger, digging for those big squishy boogers that just feel so orgasmic when you yank them out", then what we can conclude from the question is that you want to pick your nose but you are publicly embarrassed by the thought of doing anything that might give others clues that you do indeed like picking your nose.
You've never truly felt that picking your nose is wrong, or disgusting. But others make it clear that they believe it to be disgusting, and so you are forced to go along with everyone else in the pretense that picking noses is disgusting. But you just can't help yourself.
And so it is with freedom of speech. You don't believe in it as a principle. There are times when it is mostly benign (when people are saying things you agree with, or that are convenient and entertaining to hear). But past that, you can't see much utility in it. In your brain, some heuristic is telling you that it's much more likely to ban speech you find offensive, inconvenient, or just noisome than it is to ban your speech (especially in the circumstances you outline). And so, you've already made up your mind.
But how do you prevent people from pointing at you and shrieking "he just picked his nose!"?
Because you'll pick some moderators to "help with the workload". At least one of them will be a jackass. He'll claim things that aren't religion are, banhammer that person, and you'll be forced to agree with him that white is black and wet is dry, because there's nothing worse than having authority questioned when it is your authority and you're not personally harmed by it. When it becomes a public relations fiasco.
From that point forward, the definition scope creep of "religion" has been established, and it can go anywhere it needs to protect your turf. You won't be doing that personally, there will always be that disconnect so that you have some plausible deniability. And to you, it won't even look like this. You are a reasonable person, after all. Everyone else is just attacking you because of how awesome you are. Because they are trolls. And you will curl up all cozy in your echo chamber, knowing that the people who still remain all agree with you.