People Twitter

10366 readers

1429 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

Mark NSFW content.
No doxxing people.
Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
No international politcs
Be excellent to each other.
Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major celebrity, figure or any politician. https://web.archive.org/save is an option. Archive.is is no longer recommended because they remove/alter content.
If a tweet (or similar) makes a statement of fact, either mark it as "satire" in the body or provide the original source link backing up the statement

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

SendMeYourTaTas@sh.itjust.works

pelespirit@sh.itjust.works

728

Twitter disinformation is getting substantially more dangerous (lemm.ee)

submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) by WeUnite@lemm.ee to c/whitepeopletwitter@sh.itjust.works

85 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Source: https://bsky.app/profile/aoc.bsky.social/post/3ldyajiajrk2w

Archive link: https://archive.md/es2lC

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

[+] BeeDemocracy@sh.itjust.works -10 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Thank you! This is a great quote to ponder.

Fast-forward a little and the anti-semites in Germany were banning any and all press except their own and burning books in bonfires. This was a bad thing for public discourse and the public's access to truthful information. This paved the way for the Holocaust.

Censorship is inherently a fascist trait. This is not controversial.

[–] LengAwaits@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Less well known [than other paradoxes] is the paradox of tolerance: Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to murder, or to kidnapping, or to the revival of the slave trade, as criminal.

Sir Karl Raimund Popper, speaking on The Paradox Of Tolerance.

Is this fascism?