Originally posted by pilot70
I sure hope this is not the beginning of enforced political correctness.
No. It's just one step in the ongoing trials and tribulations of operating a global venue that supports and adamantly promotes free expression on an
amazingly broad range of provocative topics... all within the confines of every-day civility and decorum. The intent being that, if we can foster an
environment where personal attacks are eliminated, important topics may be productively discussed.
In my opinion the "hate speech" idea, is often used to avoid disclosing of uncomfortable truths
Actually, I'm going to modify that a bit. The typical blanket term of "hate speech" is all too often used when one encounters something that
offends them. The notion of "free expression" must tolerate being offended, but cannot tolerate those who are offensive. The fine line is difficult
to walk, but it's a walk that must be taken every day.
Zionism could be an evil conspiracy of the worst kind.
This is
not something that would draw our attention as falling within the topic of this thread.
Islam could be a satanic spirit influence.
Depending on the context, this may be something that draws our attention.
EU could be a giant NWO plot to destroy democracy in europe.
Not hate-speech.
White people could be a race of bad people out to destroy the coloured parts of humanity.
Again, context is always important... as has been expressed often times in this thread.
Making your opponent silent with such a move ammounts to censorship.
"Censorship," is an often misunderstood concept. We, as owners of ATS, have the legal right and authority to manage any topic we see fit -- removing
topics about furry bunnies if that's something we don't like. That
IS NOT censorship, it's self-determination of what we desire to oblige
within the confines of our "house."
On the other hand, if the Government determines that any discussion of Furry Bunnies is suddenly illegal... that is censorship.
In my oppinion political correctness is the direct opposite of democracy.
When in the company of those I know, I swear like a mad-man and eschew all "political correctness." Why? Because it's a known crowd of people with
whom I engage (just ask Springer about how many f-bombs I throw on the phone).
The point? Simple, know your audience. The audience here on ATS is a global mix of 1.5 million people every month, all of which have a "devil's
mix" of different social and political sensibilities. I have no problem offending these people with a provocative concept they may find difficult to
comprehend, but do have a problem with "being offensive" so that any concept I may present is immediately ignored.
There is a fine and important line to understand -- where offending people meets being offensive to people.
We are not challenged to think by ideas for which we find agreement. We're challenged to think and respond by concepts that range from
mild-disagreement to causing offense. It's human nature to want to hear/read that for which we agree. But true champions of real free expression
tolerate and support the expression of ideas that offend them.
Stating your intolerance for the race of people who initiated Zionism is offensive.
Stating your intolerance of the goals of Zionism will offend some, but is not offensive.
Unfortunately the subtlety is difficult, and history has shown us that... but it's vitally important when we engage each other in getting to the root
of provocative topics such as those discussed on ATS.
The point of all this is to know your crowd and realize it is incumbent upon
YOU to present the most provocative ideas you may have in a manner
that may offend some, but is not offensive. This is how progress and learning is achieved. This is how we should aspire to present ourselves.
I would be sad to see ATS killed by PC.
You have my personal assurance that it will not.
