I concur hard with Harv. Wouldn’t want to look at such a ban in retrospect and regret taking an easy way out.
“What would Gandhi do?” — As much as I understand of the Indian independence struggles of the previous century, Gandhi’s focus on nonviolence, when all the brits ever did was violently suppress and jail whoever opposed, was to never validate the behavior of the other side. Otherwise it entails a perpetual fight where the deciding factors become strength in numbers, not strength in morals and ideas. Instead of the ban, rather focus on building the utopia that cares for everyone. Even the other side. Fostering healthy communication, pulling the crowd into a better place, instead of sloshing everyone around with bans, will be sustainable. Lets not feed them the hate they depend on. — Akshay > On 11 Oct 2024, at 14:25, Harv Stanic Staalman via nettime-l > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Oh, how democratic and advanced. Asking for a censorship in a 21st century, > after 40 years of fighting for internet freedoms certainly brings memories of > the > //Reichsministerium//// für Volksaufklärung und Propaganda//. > I wonder which EU funding scheme sponsors this? > Geert should know better. > -- > # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission > # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, > # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets > # more info: https://www.nettime.org > # contact: [email protected] -- # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: https://www.nettime.org # contact: [email protected]
