Okay, I'm lost: why the downvotes? This sounds like reasonable comment, even useful (the first sentence is a good summary of the article's subject). I see no attack to any particular group.
What in this comment could possibly rub HN the wrong way?
What in this comment could possibly rub HN the wrong way?
> religion, anyone, conviction, enemy, must, silenced
> most, pitiful, cowardice, all, should, every last one of us, ever, surrendered, tyranny, fighting, capitulate, cower, fear
> my own country, America; disgusts, good men, put down their lives, secure, blessings, liberty, lack, confidence, courage, even, a word, defense
A few of these would be fine.
If your generation targets something that's actually harmful, you're ahead of the game.
Consider a space that becasue all speech is allowed, is dominated by speech that marginalizes some subset of the population. Is that 'free'?
I think that if you want a place of intellectual exploration, excluding people is as dangerous as excluding certain ideas. And there seems to be a trade-off.
On the surface, I was the angry stampede, and he was the voice of reason. Except he didn't seem to notice that my "strong words" tended to cancel each other (some of the words he cited actually restricted the scope of the others).
It's like the tone is more important than the message. Can't people read, before they take offence to surface details? I hope this is a loud minority problem.
Lesson learned: thou shalt not use strong words, even to express a fair and balanced position. What a mess.
Happens all the time here, unfortunately, but questioning why is a waste of time. Half the posts in this thread - ironically about free speech - are grey. The surprising thing is that your post isn't, simply for mentioning the D-word.