Which form of Thought Police works the best to censor ideas?

Page 1 of 1 [ 14 posts ] 


Which form of Thought Policing works the best to censor ideas?
Any means of persuasion which work in the given circumstance. 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Silencing them. 7%  7%  [ 1 ]
Ridiculing their ideas or perspectives. 21%  21%  [ 3 ]
Threatening them. 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Spamming them. 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Spreading rumours about them. 7%  7%  [ 1 ]
General character assasination. 7%  7%  [ 1 ]
Literal assasination. 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Intimidation of proponents - Other. 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
A combination. 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Other. 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Arguing against them. 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Arguing against their ideas. 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Allowing the proponents to speak, but letting everyone else know that everything they say is wrong. 7%  7%  [ 1 ]
Taking the proponents to court and persuading judges to vote in your favor. 7%  7%  [ 1 ]
None of these work to stop the propogation of unwanted ideas. 7%  7%  [ 1 ]
Censorship of thought is wrong/I don't like censorship of ideas. 36%  36%  [ 5 ]
Total votes : 14

iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

01 Dec 2009, 2:01 pm

[satire]Different methods work better in different circumstances. The goal however is to prevent the [strikeout]freedom of speech[/strikeout] propagation of ideas which are deemed harmful or illegal, and those that impede progress and advancement. The particular method to use is whichever works best as a means to this end.[/satire]



otto9otto
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jul 2009
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 37

01 Dec 2009, 2:48 pm

Religion![youtube]http://www.youtube.com/user/patcondell[/youtube]



zer0netgain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Mar 2009
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,612

01 Dec 2009, 5:24 pm

I say ridicule.

From what I've gathered, people with valid ideas and hard evidence get shot down by the opposition shouting that they are insane, deluded, etc. Not wanting to be associated with the social pariahs, others avoid listening to those ideas.



iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

02 Dec 2009, 7:24 am

zer0netgain wrote:
I say ridicule.

From what I've gathered, people with valid ideas and hard evidence get shot down by the opposition shouting that they are insane, deluded, etc. Not wanting to be associated with the social pariahs, others avoid listening to those ideas.


It is especially a motivation in school settings, for an ongoing tactic. For kids, they don't want to be unpopular. And, yeah, it doesn't matter if ones argument is sound or weak. Popularity is all that matters; being accepted is what counts. Presenting an argument that has a disfavorable conclusion, whether the argument is unsound or sound, will decrease popularity. And for making a statement, with or without sound or unsound reasoning, as long as it is favorable, will increase popularity, generally.



On forums it's more of a discouragement. There is no necessary requirement to attend day by day. However, it is more preemptive in regard to censorship, in this way: say something which is unpopular, you get insulted. This tends to discourage the discussion of disfavorable ideas or ensures that only one side of a view will be posted more often than the other. Not such a complete block to expressing thoughts, but still an annoyance at times. Also, having things in writing helps to diffuse insults, as even the most nasty and vitriolic conglomeration of practically randomly ordered words look simply ludicrous in writing even though they convey more force when spoken.



zer0netgain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Mar 2009
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,612

02 Dec 2009, 9:10 am

iamnotaparakeet wrote:
It is especially a motivation in school settings, for an ongoing tactic. For kids, they don't want to be unpopular. And, yeah, it doesn't matter if ones argument is sound or weak. Popularity is all that matters; being accepted is what counts.


And as life, for the most part, seems to be an ongoing drama similar to high school....

Frankly, I find that when people (NTs) reach their advanced years, they are more open to controversial ideas because they've been burned by their "friends" enough times to realize that compromising for the sake of being "popular" isn't always worth it.

That's at least one "blessing" about having AS....we're social pariahs early on and realize going with the crowd isn't going to help us all that much...so why not just be ourselves.



psych
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Nov 2005
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,488
Location: w london

02 Dec 2009, 9:27 am

religious dogma really needs to be on that list!



JRRTolkien
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 29 Nov 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 26

02 Dec 2009, 9:33 am

If you don't like someones ideas (or just someone) just say he is sexist, xenophobic, something like that.
If you ARE sexist or whatever, say you are a follower of eastern philosophy.
In this way you can be yourself AND 'salonfahig'.



psych
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Nov 2005
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,488
Location: w london

02 Dec 2009, 9:43 am

iamnotaparakeet wrote:
zer0netgain wrote:
I say ridicule.

From what I've gathered, people with valid ideas and hard evidence get shot down by the opposition shouting that they are insane, deluded, etc. Not wanting to be associated with the social pariahs, others avoid listening to those ideas.


It is especially a motivation in school settings, for an ongoing tactic. For kids, they don't want to be unpopular. And, yeah, it doesn't matter if ones argument is sound or weak. Popularity is all that matters; being accepted is what counts. Presenting an argument that has a disfavorable conclusion, whether the argument is unsound or sound, will decrease popularity. And for making a statement, with or without sound or unsound reasoning, as long as it is favorable, will increase popularity, generally.



On forums it's more of a discouragement. There is no necessary requirement to attend day by day. However, it is more preemptive in regard to censorship, in this way: say something which is unpopular, you get insulted. This tends to discourage the discussion of disfavorable ideas or ensures that only one side of a view will be posted more often than the other. Not such a complete block to expressing thoughts, but still an annoyance at times. Also, having things in writing helps to diffuse insults, as even the most nasty and vitriolic conglomeration of practically randomly ordered words look simply ludicrous in writing even though they convey more force when spoken.


david icke calls this effect the 'hassle free zone'

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lc1jRZtE ... re=related
the rush-hour comment at 3:15 is a strong image.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 84
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

02 Dec 2009, 10:22 am

Self censorship is the most effective mode of censorship.

Scare people into being silent or into avoiding confrontation.

ruveyn



phil777
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 May 2008
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,825
Location: Montreal, Québec

02 Dec 2009, 8:08 pm

ruveyn wrote:
Self censorship is the most effective mode of censorship.


QFT



Friskeygirl
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Jun 2009
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,865

03 Dec 2009, 2:00 am

ruveyn wrote:
Self censorship is the most effective mode of censorship.

Scare people into being silent or into avoiding confrontation.

ruveyn

That can be quite affective, especially if your prone to bad meltdowns



TitusLucretiusCarus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Jan 2009
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 518

03 Dec 2009, 2:55 am

the American mass media. It's a perfect organism for oppressing any ideas the ruling oligarchy dislike - some things slip through the gaps, but don't reach everyone.



Nambo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2007
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,882
Location: Prussia

06 Dec 2009, 6:23 pm

Call them an anti-semite, that works the best, even gets you locked up in some countries.
What chance the poor Palestinians eh?, would you sacrifiice your political career to try and help them?



Cyanide
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2006
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,003
Location: The Pacific Northwest

06 Dec 2009, 9:40 pm

Use these following words: Anti-Semitic, Racist, Xenophobic, Insane, Deluded, Sexist, Homophobic...

These days making fallacious, unfounded accusations of discrimination is an extremely effective tactic. Just look at the pro-Obama crowd calling everyone who doesn't like him a "racist". If you ask them HOW that necessarily makes one a racist, I guarantee you none of them will be able to give you a solid answer.

Also, just laughing works too. If someone starts claiming that the government or big business is bad, or that some commonly-accepted thing isn't true, just start laughing in the middle of their argument. If you do it before they get too far along, then the others in the audience might join you thinking about their image above all else.