Should moderators be required to show good faith in not being biased, by actually reading a post prior to banning the post?
I bring up a parallel in philosophy, blind censorship… such as bookburnings.
It is obvious the Nazis didn’t read all those books, they outright proscribed it, and demanded they be burnt.
If knowledge is power, and power has a role in Ethics and morals, do moderators have a ETHICAL RESPONSIBILITY to actually examine a post to see if it is valid or not, or should they ban it immediately because it makes them unsettled and asks them to examine their actions introspectiveky and socially?
I notice one of the results of the failed campaign by the US colonies prior to the US revolution was to get Parliament to listen to their views. Parliament acted heavy handed, assured of it’s supremacy and right to do whatever, however… resulted in a war, a very long and nasty war. The outcome was a Republican system of government, that made ELECTION OF COMPETENT OFFICIALS it’s preferred course, with debate and discourse near mandatory in legislation, and made it’s first and for most guaranteed essential right, the Freedom of Speech, untouchable and centrly enshirned as the highest value of our society.
Part of this involves free discource. We hope central yo this one of Voltaire’s greatest lines, often quoted “I dissaprove of what you say, but I will fight to the death your right to say it”.
However… saying something, especially a criticism and examination of politics, say what Isiah Thomas, Benjamin Franklin, or Thomas Paine did… all revolutionary war philosophers, and have it immediately hidden and repressed, seems contrary to freedom of thought, of free expression and discoursr. It denies due process, the right to be defended by peers, the rights to conscious, to disagree, to criticize repressive acts, to offer a greater vision, to spark a larger debate.
I note the Inquisition at least offered fact finding trials prior to it’s burning of proscribed books. Repression resulted in a full fledged reformation rebellion by Protestants, who chased Catholics down in the streets with whatever was in hand. As a Catholic, I try to keep such reactions in mind. It is far better to let people speak openly and freely, even when it us painful to our self esteem. Criticism can hurt, but is still philosophically valid. Some of our best ideas in history come from it.
I’m likely going to be banned due to Only Humean’s actions, so encourage everyone to carry on the discussion without me. I will check in with Joker on occasion. I’m sorry for Only Humean’s actions… but know positive change isn’t possible without confrontation, when all other avenues are stripped from you, as it has gotten on this forum. We are now approaching a breaking point, somebody has to go, and I wonder very much who that somebody will be? I ask sarcastically of course. You know damn well he will do anything he can to continue without having to ever reexamine his actions.
