[extropy-chat] Open and hidden fascism in Exi forum

[Kelly M. Ramsey]

>I deeply despise anybody who thinks he is so cool by actively participating
>in this scandalous thread and for giving RB the pleasure of being heard.

Including yourself? No, that can't be right. An operational definition of 
"actively participating" must be embedded in the statement, then. This 
appears to be more a reaction to _how_ people are responding than the fact 
of response itself.

This is outrage over methods. Some people expressed their opinions, perhaps 
with the insight of past experience, with appalled dismissals. Other people 
attempted to pick apart either the moral case or the practical case in an 
effort to argue that both lead to absurdly counterproductive conclusions. 
Still other people attempted to guide discussion in directions they thought 
more useful. None of this was agreement; it was disagreement, differently 
proposed.

People who agree with one, but who go about _talking about things_ 
differently, make a poor choice of enemies. People who disagree with one 
often make a poor choice of enemies, too; it seems more useful to challenge 
the facts and attack the idea, not the person.

>The Exi President in her very own naive ignorance and with that 
>unfortunate lack
>of sensitivity does not stop this embarrassing thread

Outside of basic, mutually agreed-upon controls (language, relevance, 
length, etc.), limiting the topics and discussions of a forum would feel 
rather "fascist" to me. Also, by this standard any movement, organization, 
or list manager who doesn't step in instantly to quash talk outside the 
party platform would be inept, hypocritical, and/or disloyal to the cause. 
This is a recipe for ideological lockstep, polarization, and groupthink.


Kelly Ramsey
ramseyk at uci.edu