Am scris un articol mic pe reddit dupa un mic scandal ce a luat foc dupa multe comentarii inflamatoare si urate...
Eu am luat pozitia de "avocat al diavolului" fiindca am observat ca nimeni altcineva nu a intervenit. Adica, in apararea ateilor "ofensivi", atei "noi", atei "jignitori" s.a.m.d. Este trist cand vad ca comunitatea de atei se aliaza vocal cu credinciosi impotriva altor atei; trebuie sa existe spatiu gri, non-binar, unde nu se intampla asa cacaturi.
Since the What the fuck, guys has exploded with bullshit and hate, I feel the need to offer something in defense of those "atheist assholes" everyone loves to hate.
The first thing to point out is that I don't appreciate the call to conformity: don't be a dick. This kind of call is what enables the creation of censorship laws and their acceptance by the citizenry. IT gets very close to blasphemy laws and no atheist can be in favour of such laws.
Being a dick, being an asshole, falls under a right, one which must be always protected. I'm not going to argue for the right of free speech here, since that would be an insult to most of you.
If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all.
My second point is that there is too little sympathy and empathy for assholes and dicks. It's easy to think they don't need it, but let's try to think about it.
On the internet, many experienced users become jaded and cynical, due to reaching a level of saturation when it comes to bullshit, scams, ponzy scheems, trolls, propaganda etc. You might not be saturated with such stuff; you might have little experience on the Internet or you've had some, but it was with people you knew and it was fine. Few people are so lucky.
Some day, you too could become and asshole.
People who've been surfing the web for many years tend to experience a lot of bad shit, and if you haven't yet, you will, because it is inevitable. So let's not be so harsh on people who have turned skeptical and jaded and leave mean and insensitive comments; they're not monsters, but people who have themselves been traumatised to the point where they have little trust to give and little tolerance for bullshit.
The assholes are actually so allergic to bullshit that they are of great use for detecting it, which is why every society needs them because they also bear the risk of finding the bullshit first, which is almost like finding a mine (bomb) first.
Bonus, raspunsuri la comentarii:
Sympathy for people that shove their bullshit down other people's throats?
nobody's shoving anything; it's a website, if you don't like what you see, there's a downvote button or even an [X] button somewhere in the upper corners of the screen
So we're talking about people that have witnessed the ugly of mankind and instead of becoming compassionate and seeing that man is oft corrupted by itself, they become a part of that festering shithole that contributes to the cyclical, endless gangbang of hatred and rudeness? And we're supposed to feel bad for these guys?
Yes, empathy. It's also a humanist value.
What, you thought the World was so simple ? just black and white?
You've got to be fucking kidding.
Here. For your first point, an analogy. Racists. Ku Klux Klan. Neo-Nazis. You will agree that they deserve the right to free speech, yes? They should be allowed to say what they will. Right? I mean, there were Jews fighting for Neo-Nazi groups in the 60's, defending their right to protest. But that doesn't fucking mean we should say it's okay.
Yes, they have free speech too. When crimes happen, that shouldn't go unpunished. I'm not asking to say it's OK, I'm just asking for more understanding, beyond the black-and-white view of stuff.
You're like Laura Schlessinger when she went on air saying "niggerniggernigger!" and when companies stopped paying her for advertisement time, she started bitching to Larry King about her 1st amendment rights getting trampled. The government should let us say what we want, but it's up to the people to decide what's right and what's wrong.
Radio and TV frequencies are regulated because they have to be reserved; a company must own a frequency to have reliable signal. The state is the only one who can protect those frequencies from other signals, from pirate radios and pirate tv channels - that is why it can also claim to regulate what's actually broadcasting.
Everything else run on cables and satellites with digitally encoded signals is not an interference with the public "air", so it should not be regulated in any way (this includes internet and telephones). All the other rules should come through democratic-constitutional process, as you said, but then you get into politics. I'm a liberal, "live and let live", so I'm not a fan of censorship of any kind, even tough I might not like it.
To put it simply: I will tolerate all kinds of speech, including hateful, racist and otherwise, but I will react to it in some way, usually ridicule, since ridicule is the best way to point out absurd and outrageous ideas, not self-righteousness.
These are bitter, lonely old fools in their basement with the lights off so they can't get enough vitamin D to feel at peace with their lives. These people should be shunned and hated.
I see you're quite the fan of hate-speech and hate in general.
I'll spend my time being compassionate to people who have actually seen hard times, rather than people who can't even control themselves enough to be civil on an internet forum.
Funny how hate itself doesn't seem to bother you or doesn't stand for anything in your moral high-ground fortress.
Well, you've just made their ranks... congratulations, asshole :)
Un schimb mai lung: despre "being a dick" si daca ajuta sau nu