Reading the comments of the people who want it suppressed and didn’t get mass downvoted, I ran into something common:
They want it banned because they believe that the society that they want is completely incompatible with that content existing, or that banning said content is completely consistent with 1A because the US existed for almost 200 years without such content (porn in general, lolisho really only got over here because of anime becoming a sensation) being mass distributed throughout the country.
Going back to lolisho specifically, there’s no way to get around the fact that sexual lolisho art depicts children in sexual situations, and I personally don’t believe that anime looking like it does matters, because that’s still a human out there, so the reaction to it is gonna be what it is regardless. The discussion tends to be a lot more…focused and less calling people authoritarians and pedos when we actually address the elephant in the room, so I might as well do it in the main post instead of a comment.
I’m just a college student that’s not that well informed on why this is being used as a canary in the coalmine, but I’ll let y’all have at it.
Unless you are a retarded anarchist you realize every aspect of civilization from property rights to self defense requires exercise of authority.
The question that people who aren't retarded argue of is in what situations that exercise is proper.
Authoritarian != totalitarian. Gay commies are totalitarian, actual strong civilization is authoritarian.
The people who don't like the person exercising the authority will always call it "authoritarianism". There is no point in running away from that label, it just paralyzes you, which is what the gay commies rely on.
But lets pretend you know what you are talking out. Why don't you explain for the class what you think the difference between authority and authoritarianism, and also what the difference is between authoritarianism and totalitarianism.
Looking forward to your failure of a reply.
Authoritarianism is a pejorative against exercise of (mostly) governmental authority, used formerly by dissidents and now by pretty much everyone when the government does something they don't like.
But you made a distinction without a difference. Every government exercises authority and every one of those exercises can be justified as "absolutely necessary" depending on who is holding the gun. The gay commies will say arresting the January 6th protestors and prosecuting President Trump is absolutely necessary. FDR would say interning the ethnic japanese americans was absolutely necessary. The Indonesia 1965 government will say killing all of the commies was absolutely necessary.
Has there ever been a functioning government that wasn't "authoritarian?"
Uh, personal authority is not authoritarianism. The less the government is involved, at least on this issue, the more free you are to exercise your "authority" in self defense.
Also, as I've said in other comments, there's a huge difference between legislating morality, and legislating against harm or violation. There's a huge difference between positive and negative rights.
We make laws to protect people's rights and freedoms, not their feelings.
It's illegal to murder, steal, rape, or take advantage of someone who doesn't have agency (e.g. children), because that directly infringes on the rights of the victim. Immoral or distasteful fiction that does not involve any parties that are nonconsenting or lacking agency, and whose consumption thereof is entirely voluntary (i.e. not pushed in schools and the like) does not have a victim. So in that respect there's a very clear line, which is why some people think "authority" is fine to be leveraged in one scenario, but not the other.
Look I was also a lolbert before I grew up. But world war T made it clear, live and let live is not an option. If you read any of the gay commie "theory" you will see that they have no stopping point and their pursuit of their "ultimate goal" will always end in total human extinction.
More gay commies enjoy and partake and PUBLICLY SUPPORT degenerate porn than our people do. Therefore making possession of it a criminal offense is a net win for us.
You think in principles, the other side thinks in friend-enemy distinctions.
We can argue over DMs why the non aggression pact and most other lolbert concepts are retarded but that isn't the issue of the day here.
Firstly, you didn't address any of my points. Secondly, as I've said repeatedly, the left still controls everything. If you want to go totalitarian, can you fucking please at least wait until you take over everything first?! That's my big issue; this is counterproductive.
If you want to be authoritarian, there's a right way to do it, and a correct order in which to do it. Doing it out of order just blows up in your face. Take back the culture, take back education, then we can talk about whether we should ban "degeneracy" or not. That's my point.
I admit I do have libertarian leanings still, but I try to come at everything from a practical angle, and can have an honest discussion about libertarianism versus authoritarianism, and see the points of the latter too. Again, my point is this seems utterly impractical.
And if you embrace their viewpoint, you'll have no endpoint either. You have to meld both; you have to acknowledge friend-enemy distinction, but you also have to have principles, or you have nothing. You also have to do things in a sensible way, which porn bans at present are absolutely not.
Again, not as long as they control the majority of the institutions. Unless you're in a position to operate the majority of levers of power, you're just giving them more power, even if you believe you're hurting them in the short term.
The majority of the legal system favors the left, despite their disproportionate criminality and harmfulness. Why the fuck would you want to write more laws chipping away at certain rights, while they still maintain power?
That sounds even gayer than arguing over a public forum, I'll have to decline.
The end point is normalcy where gay commie subversion is recognized, disregarded, and the people who are engaging in it are exiled.
What exactly are you afraid of them doing that they aren't doing now?