I'd rather live under a dictator who generally believes in and espouses the principles of free speech - and enforces it inconsistently and subjectively because it's always going to be subjective - than a committee of busybodies who publicly hold contempt for the very concept and admit to wanting to limit broad categories of speech for the "safety" of communities because somehow words are dangerous.
Right, but you have to be aware that dictator doesn't stay there forever either. A benevolent dictator works only as far as they stay in power until someone takes it over
Basically that "structure" that allowed the benevolent dictator to control us will simply be replaced by another group who will utilize that same structure to censor us. Which is why a "wild west" approach to the Internet is way more important and decentralization and a lack of ANY kind of dictator is always better for the free movement of information.
I'd rather live under a dictator who generally believes in and espouses the principles of free speech - and enforces it inconsistently and subjectively because it's always going to be subjective - than a committee of busybodies who publicly hold contempt for the very concept and admit to wanting to limit broad categories of speech for the "safety" of communities because somehow words are dangerous.
Right, but you have to be aware that dictator doesn't stay there forever either. A benevolent dictator works only as far as they stay in power until someone takes it over
Basically that "structure" that allowed the benevolent dictator to control us will simply be replaced by another group who will utilize that same structure to censor us. Which is why a "wild west" approach to the Internet is way more important and decentralization and a lack of ANY kind of dictator is always better for the free movement of information.