Re: List Moderation

[ken <kenneth.mackendrick@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

This comes up time and time again.  Censorship is not an
answer to contradiction.  The fact that the issue is coming up
now indicates to me that Ralph is probably right about
something which threatens the integrity of the offended
parties (at least he has hit a nerve).  Censorship is usually a
paranoid reaction that comes out of fear (usually the fear that
a 'foreign' element is stealing something of value - usually
some sort of enjoyment) (in this case, Ralph is perceived of
as stealing the jouissance of hen pecked 'analytic' critical
theory).

Is it that difficult to reach for the delete key?  Are the words
here that offensive that some sort of hate speech laws need
be passed?  Perhaps someone should contact the police
instead of calling for a moderator.  Should freedom of
expression be limited to something 'over there' - where I am
not?  Perhaps freedom is best left as an abstraction, since its
actuality might have a hint of antagonism...

The best arguments I've heard for censorship revolve around
Marcuse's notion of repressive tolerance.  So something is
tolerated despite is repressive and silencing characteristics.
And yes, this might in fact be the case.  Outbursts of anger
and frustration may in fact be repressive for those who find
solace in delicate conversation or speculative engagement.
But this is a (postmodern) discourse of victimization (lurker as
victim) - wherein which the Other is understood a priori as
weak and timid, so debate should be limited, beforehand,
because the participants might be left or rendered helpless.
Of course, this also encourages participants to enjoy the
benefits of no longer being responsible for their actions / lack
of actions which reinforces sado-masochistic structures.
Censorship here is a 'big brother' that lends a helping hand to
the weak (of course 'the weak' don't exactly get to identify
themselves, it is a designation imposed) (and it is never a
discourse that goes on in the name of oneself - it is always in
the name of the Other).  So, for those who think that
censorship might be a good alternative - please - who are you
speaking for?  Yourself or an (IMAGINED!) Other.

ken