I've discovered over my time that Rule 16 is actually necessary to prevent the intentional balkanization and radicalization that Progressive Identity Politics promotes in every and all circumstances in order to deceive and recruit people into accepting pure ideological meta-narratives, that can be used as a reductive way to explain all problems.
You got mugged? It was niggers. Problem at the bank? Jews trying to demoralize you. Problem with cops? Mayo Monkeys asserting their privilege. Problems with rent? Kill the landlords. They are, each and every single one of them, involved in a cabal that exists to make your life miserable. If only you just listen to me, and accept my over-arching metanarrative, you can have a get-out-of-thinking free card to point out that the secret cabal that ruins your life is always out to get you. But don't worry... I'm your friend
It's always the same objective: balkanization, deindividuation, and control.
Here's the problem. Conquests' 2nd law applies because Leftists are relentless. Any binary, ideological, meta-narrative will be exploited. Even anti-Communism has been exploited by Leftists, that's where the 3 arrows comes from. The third one is anti-Communism, and it was a propaganda symbol of the German Democratic Socialists.
The power-only-based narratives on ideological binaries are always structured in bad faith to manipulate people into acquiescing to an ideology. It's never about an honest discussion. Even the free speech movement in the 70's was a Leftist attack on anti-Communist standards, even if it was Liberalizing to speech. The point was never to Liberalize speech, but to break down the barriers holding Leftism back.
Let's look at Holocaust Denial for example. There are NO National Socialists that believe the Holocaust was fake. None. This is because they know the Holocaust was real and they think it's a good thing. Same thing with the Communists and the Holodomor. They were doing what any Leftist would do when in a position of power: exterminating potential political enemies and eliminating the asserted bourgeoise people. This is why Holocaust Denial arguments are violently ignorant, totally uninformed, and completely uninterested in facts. People have actually told me that the Holocaust couldn't have happened because it's not possible for all 6 million jews to have been killed in Auschwitz because they didn't know there was more than one death camp. I'm actually starting to see people argue that they couldn't have killed 6 million jews because there wasn't 6 million jews in Germany... they don't even know that Polish jews were being killed. This coming from people who claim that they learned about the Holocaust 4-6 times in public education, starting from elementary school. Yet, this isn't even a passing knowledge of the event.
Every conspiracy theory I've ever seen knows a little about everything, but not enough detail to understand that some things make sense. Most of the time, they have an autistic level of detail on a lot of things, but don't know how it's put together. Holocaust Denial is different because the denialist isn't a conspiracy theorist. He knows it happened, and is hoping people are dumb enough to believe him. This isn't exactly a normal exchange of ideas. It's sophistry and rhetorical warfare. The marketplace of ideas, fundamentally assumes honest belief in the exchange. It doesn't assume fraud. This is why even some of the strongest free market advocates would demand a mechanism to get compensation from fraud in the market. Fraud must be punished even in the free market.
The one thing I've learned in dealing with the racialists on this forum is that they are sophists that are operating on repetition as if it were hypnotism. To this very day, I still see people repeating (((Echo-Posts))) despite it being allowed. It's never-ending. It's, intentionally, a non-stop assault on the senses. Every second, every day, every post: jews, goy, oy vey, niggers, shabbos, gorillian, for no reason at all, goyim, sheckles, dindu, 1488, Patton, wrong enemy, holohoax, etc. Etc.
This is intentional. It's basically a form of Leftist demoralization, it's why so many of them are black-pilled. The utility of this demoralization is that it's balkanizing. People, really do get tired of some asshole coming in and shititng up the place. It's infuriating to have live with someone who won't stop screaming about jews literally all day long. Eventually, people leave because it's not worth it to listen to that crap forever. If it were one and only one (like with Imp), it's easy to point and laugh. However, if there is a concerted, collective, effort to never stop pushing the narrative by dozens of people; then it becomes a problem that requires more aggression. The racialists absolutely do this. ConPro, Voat, and Poal were all evidence this. They never, for even one second, stopped absolutely badgering their ideology at all times until the place either kills itself (Voat), heavily segregates itself and becomes a bit of an echo-chamber (Poal), or becomes an ideological activist hug (ConPro). Worse, I deeply fear that ConPro isn't just the idealogs, but a slew of actual, malicious glowniggers that are trying to get innocent people killed.
That's the final danger. Not only are we talking about insane idealogues trying to engage in ideological capture; but with them are a number of purely malicious actors who want to kill and imprison people. No argument from free speech can stand, when the purpose of that speech is to get you to stick your head out from the trenches and be shot.
And all of it comes from a specific, sophistic, meta-narrative utilizing the friend-enemy distinction based on entire populations of unaffiliated people. That is why the rule exists. Perhaps it is ineloquent, but that sophistry must not be allowed because it is destructive, and perhaps intentionally so.
Disinformation works on the same premise. Disinformation is explicitly fraudulent. It is false information spread by a belligerent in order to sew the malicious information as a weapon against their target. A marketplace of ideas may call out the disinformation. But then the issue should be resolved when the fraud is known. The only reason someone would repeat disinformation is to test the defenses of said marketplace of ideas, and hopefully permeate the idea through repetition. "Hands Up Don't Shoot". Even though the marketplace might have a damaging effect on several of these attacks, it might not stop all of them, since they are used collectively.
I've discovered over my time that Rule 16 is actually necessary to prevent the intentional balkanization and radicalization that Progressive Identity Politics promotes in every and all circumstances in order to deceive and recruit people into accepting pure ideological meta-narratives, that can be used as a reductive way to explain all problems.
You got mugged? It was niggers. Problem at the bank? Jews trying to demoralize you. Problem with cops? Mayo Monkeys asserting their privilege. Problems with rent? Kill the landlords. They are, each and every single one of them, involved in a cabal that exists to make your life miserable. If only you just listen to me, and accept my over-arching metanarrative, you can have a get-out-of-thinking free card to point out that the secret cabal that ruins your life is always out to get you. But don't worry... I'm your friend
It's always the same objective: balkanization, deindividuation, and control.
Here's the problem. Conquests' 2nd law applies because Leftists are relentless. Any binary, ideological, meta-narrative will be exploited. Even anti-Communism has been exploited by Leftists, that's where the 3 arrows comes from. The third one is anti-Communism, and it was a propaganda symbol of the German Democratic Socialists.
The power-only-based narratives on ideological binaries are always structured in bad faith to manipulate people into acquiescing to an ideology. It's never about an honest discussion. Even the free speech movement in the 70's was a Leftist attack on anti-Communist standards, even if it was Liberalizing to speech. The point was never to Liberalize speech, but to break down the barriers holding Leftism back.
Let's look at Holocaust Denial for example. There are NO National Socialists that believe the Holocaust was fake. None. This is because they know the Holocaust was real and they think it's a good thing. Same thing with the Communists and the Holodomor. They were doing what any Leftist would do when in a position of power: exterminating potential political enemies and eliminating the asserted bourgeoise people. This is why Holocaust Denial arguments are violently ignorant, totally uninformed, and completely uninterested in facts. People have actually told me that the Holocaust couldn't have happened because it's not possible for all 6 million jews to have been killed in Auschwitz because they didn't know there was more than one death camp. I'm actually starting to see people argue that they couldn't have killed 6 million jews because there wasn't 6 million jews in Germany... they don't even know that Polish jews were being killed. This coming from people who claim that they learned about the Holocaust 4-6 times in public education, starting from elementary school. Yet, this isn't even a passing knowledge of the event.
Every conspiracy theory I've ever seen knows a little about everything, but not enough detail to understand that some things make sense. Most of the time, they have an autistic level of detail on a lot of things, but don't know how it's put together. Holocaust Denial is different because the denialist isn't a conspiracy theorist. He knows it happened, and is hoping people are dumb enough to believe him. This isn't exactly a normal exchange of ideas. It's sophistry and rhetorical warfare. The marketplace of ideas, fundamentally assumes honest belief in the exchange. It doesn't assume fraud. This is why even some of the strongest free market advocates would demand a mechanism to get compensation from fraud in the market. Fraud must be punished even in the free market.
The one thing I've learned in dealing with the racialists on this forum is that they are sophists that are operating on repetition as if it were hypnotism. To this very day, I still see people repeating (((Echo-Posts))) despite it being allowed. It's never-ending. It's, intentionally, a non-stop assault on the senses. Every second, every day, every post: jews, goy, oy vey, niggers, shabbos, gorillian, for no reason at all, goyim, sheckles, dindu, 1488, Patton, wrong enemy, holohoax, etc. Etc.
This is intentional. It's basically a form of Leftist demoralization, it's why so many of them are black-pilled. The utility of this demoralization is that it's balkanizing. People, really do get tired of some asshole coming in and shititng up the place. It's infuriating to have live with someone who won't stop screaming about jews literally all day long. Eventually, people leave because it's not worth it to listen to that crap forever. If it were one and only one (like with Imp), it's easy to point and laugh. However, if there is a concerted, collective, effort to never stop pushing the narrative by dozens of people; then it becomes a problem that requires more aggression. The racialists absolutely do this. ConPro, Voat, and Poal were all evidence this. They never, for even one second, stopped absolutely badgering their ideology at all times until the place either kills itself (Voat), heavily segregates itself and becomes a bit of an echo-chamber (Poal), or becomes an ideological activist hug (ConPro). Worse, I deeply fear that ConPro isn't just the idealogs, but a slew of actual, malicious glowniggers that are trying to get innocent people killed.
That's the final danger. Not only are we talking about insane idealogues trying to engage in ideological capture; but with them are a number of purely malicious actors who want to kill and imprison people. No argument from free speech can stand, when the purpose of that speech is to get you to stick your head out from the trenches and be shot.
And all of it comes from a specific, sophistic, meta-narrative utilizing the friend-enemy distinction based on entire populations of unaffiliated people. That is why the rule exists. Perhaps it is ineloquent, but that sophistry must not be allowed because it is destructive, and perhaps intentionally so.