/lit/ - Literature

>>10797058

Words are not bullets and you should be able to say whatever you want, even if it is false or offending for someone.
That said, if a false claim cannot be defeated by the sheer force of truth and right arguments, then there is a problem with the true claim.

Therefore, I think you have a right to suppress racism, xenophobia, hyper-nationalism, if they act violently. As violent action, they must be stopped. As thoughts and opinions, they are completely legitimate, as well as any other opinion, and neither me, you, the State or anyone else has the right to tell people what they ought to think.

As soon as you step outside these boundaries, you are forsaking not only freedom of speech but democracy in general. Democracy works like this: the one who is better at convincing people wins. Nobody has any right to shut down any discourse if people find it convincing. This is a flaw of course, because people who are more convincing are not necessarily right. But democracy IS flawed: you either take it with its flaws, or forsake the flaws together with the positive things (freedom of speech and thought).

You either accept that people will think stupid, false, possibly dangerous and disruptive stuff, and live democratically, or you decide that there should be some authority which tells others what to think, and you become totalitarian.
There is no third option.

>>10693481
new cover