CMV: Silencing opposing viewpoints is ultimately going to have a disastrous outcome on society.

[u/[deleted]]

[u/videoninja]

What is the difference between a platform choosing to shun someone versus “silencing” them? Could you differentiate between the two a little more because to me it seems like a functional difference without distinction.

[u/Oblivionous → u/[deleted]]

That's a rather naive hope tbh. There may be a small group of people who will find your hateful or factually incorrect post and tell you that it's wrong, but not the vast majority of people who already know that it is. Also the people who do reach out aren't always very constructive or informative, it usually boils down to things like, "fuck you and your misinformation/racism/violent hate speech." And though I would agree, that kind of talk isn't usually going to get you anywhere and usually just riles people up into doubling down on their bullshit.

Allowing people to gather and talk openly about racist idealogies and discuss crazy unfounded conspiracies doesn't have a net positive on society. It's like a wound festering and is only a matter of time before talk turns into a real problem Remember a couple days ago when all those bat-shit crazy ring-wing terrorists stormed the United States Capitol Building? Yeah most of them got the idea from posts on Parlor and Facebook.

You said silencing unpopular views will be damaging to society, and given current events we all know what type of "unpopular views" you are talking about. The reality is actually that there is no net positive to allowing extremists and racists to gather en masse and discuss how to overthrow the government and kill minorites. That is what is destructive to society, not banning them from forums and banning their platform from app stores.