Already addressed this elsewhere in the thread, but dropping a Wikipedia link to the Paradox of Tolerance is the most predictable, lazy response I receive anytime free speech is discussed.
I would strongly encourage you to actually go read Karl Popper’s original text—or even just the link you just dropped—rather than just throwing out the title of the theory.
If you had done the reading, you would know Popper explicitly wrote: “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.” He stated that suppression is only justified when a group abandons debate and starts using fists and weapons.
By cheering for a mob to use physical violence to preemptively shut down someone speaking, you are acting as the exact intolerant, anti-democratic threat that Popper warned about. You are using a philosopher’s warning against political violence to justify political violence.
Go read the literature, along with the subsequent challenges by modern sociologists, before dropping the link.
Weak response.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
Already addressed this elsewhere in the thread, but dropping a Wikipedia link to the Paradox of Tolerance is the most predictable, lazy response I receive anytime free speech is discussed.
I would strongly encourage you to actually go read Karl Popper’s original text—or even just the link you just dropped—rather than just throwing out the title of the theory.
If you had done the reading, you would know Popper explicitly wrote: “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.” He stated that suppression is only justified when a group abandons debate and starts using fists and weapons.
By cheering for a mob to use physical violence to preemptively shut down someone speaking, you are acting as the exact intolerant, anti-democratic threat that Popper warned about. You are using a philosopher’s warning against political violence to justify political violence.
Go read the literature, along with the subsequent challenges by modern sociologists, before dropping the link.
Look at the state of fascist movements across literally the entire world right now.
Are we “counter[ing] them by rational argument and keep[ing] them in check by public opinion”? I think not.
Surely you don’t think things like the Southport and Nowak riots weren’t violent, do you? Aside from that
Generally does not mean “after we have”.