Toxic statements = statements from a different political orientation
Why are people so willing to embrace Orwellian doublethink? My prediction is that such a sword will do decapitate undeserving people of all political aisles.
This is obviously going to be subjective. I'd argue that people prone to using the currently popular buzz-word "toxic" when referring to opinions hold certain common political and social viewpoints and beliefs. In other words, this is implicitly a partisan (not objective) project that is mostly an attempt to enumerate wrongthink.
"Toxic" means not aligned with the left "progressive" values. It is just a political ban of opposing views, nothing new here and it never worked, the views find their ways to air themselves in one way or another.
Toxic and hate speech are recently invented terms to curtail free speech. If I said anyone who wanted communism were hateful (they hate capitalists) and supporting a historically violent ideology, I'd be as right/wrong as people on the left doing the same.
Anti free speech are a means to an end really, power.
Let’s be honest - toxic here just means “people are accessing content that doesn’t agree with my personal politics”. This word doesn’t have meaning anymore, like “fascism”.
I think I probably could have caveated a little better, and said something like:
"People are throwing around the word 'toxic' far too freely. I'm worried about over-sensitivity and censorship. Because of these concerns, I'm apt to push back on characterizations that words and ideas are harmful, even if the ideas themselves are flawed and open to criticism. Specifically, flawed ideas that deserve to be criticized can't really hurt you in the way that 'toxic' implies."
These days, any argument featuring the word "toxic" is very likely flawed and should be ignored. There's far too much moralizing and far too little understanding going around.
Intellectual impoverishment is but one side-effect.
Wrong. Saying so is dangerously minimizing the problem.
reply