mekka okereke Nov 9, 2024

Part of my joy comes from blocking angry dudes that feel entitled to engagement. Highly recommend it! 👍🏿

I don't have to talk with everybody. There are so many people that are genuinely curious and open minded, that I just don't have to deal with these dudes.

There's an effectively infinite supply of "dudes on the internet." There is absolutely no shortage. The marginal cost of blocking one, is close to zero.

"Well, what about the marketplace of ideas huh? Not very inclusive of you!"

OK! 🤣

Show threadmekka okereke Nov 9, 2024

Paradox of tolerance and all that.

I don't see it as a paradox at all. You cannot include all ideas, because one of the loudest ideas, is "We should silence the ideas of Black people!" 🙂🙃

You cannot include this idea without excluding other ideas. So absolute inclusion shouldn't even be anyone's goal. It's certainly not mine.

And dealing with annoying people online can be exhausting. Even if they're not malicious! Me doing "racism 101" individually for millions of people, just doesn't work.

Show threadDan Neuman 🇨🇦Nov 10, 2024
@mekkaokereke That's my perspective as well. You get more free speech if you exclude hate speech. If you include hate speech, then you lose *all* the speech from the victims. It's a loss for society because minorities have the unique perspectives you don't have in the dominant culture. Edit: I mean, from a market of ideas perspective. It is just wrong from a societal perspective.
Show threadktp_programmingNov 10, 2024

@dan613 @mekkaokereke
Maybe it is because USA was born with that principle of free speech that they have a hard time what it meant not having it. Free speech is about not being persecuted by officials for stating an opinion, about the state, about the church, about science. It has never been about gaining access to a platform or a right to a public.

Free speech applied to hate speech gives them the right to not be jailed for stating their opinion in a KKK rag.

Free speech also means that everyone is free to set up rule in their media, social or otherwise, to select opinions it wants published.

Show threadmekka okereke Nov 10, 2024

@ktp_programming @dan613

The US has never really had free speech. Ever.🤷🏿‍♂️

There's never been a point in US history when Black folk could speak freely without severe consequences from their government. By severe consequences, I mean government programs designed to falsely imprison or execute them.

Slavery was obvious.

To Jim Crow: cops & politicians targeting "uppity" negroes.

To COINTELPRO.

To "Black Identity extremists."

US free speech usually just means "Let the nazis talk"

1/N

Show threadAuka Kapak
@mekkaokereke @ktp_programming @dan613 I think it's not just the US but most of the Americas countries where the dominant classes were of European descent. Here in Argentina, for example, the african descending populations were not only used as cannon fodder but also erased from official history for a century and a half. And aboriginal peoples were also denied, suffered genocide and their mere existence disregarded in a blattantly way.
Nov 10, 2024 at 4:21pmWeb
Show threada*lfonso adriasol&Nov 10, 2024

@auka_kapak @mekkaokereke @ktp_programming @dan613 tangent: black freedmen were a large portion of the army that fought for the independence of Chile and Peru
this is not taught

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Army_of_the_Andes?wprov=sfti1

Army of the Andes - Wikipedia

Show threadAuka KapakNov 10, 2024
@aadriasola @mekkaokereke @ktp_programming @dan613 of course, as many slave owners sent their slaves to fight, often offering to send up to even eight instead of one of their own family. Sgt. Bautista Cabral, who saved Gen. San Martín 's life in San Lorenzo, was an afro descendant, which led to his image be neglected and denied for decades in the official history, and there is literally no portrait, pictorical reference nor word depiction of his person.