Well, yeah, sure, in an ideal world. But we're talking the Internet here. It's a place where just as soon as you're shouting down a bigot or even just arguing over some political point, someone on the opposite end of the spectrum jumps into your conversation and goes at you the other way too hard. It's emotion vs. logic and a lot of people argue with emotion. Then someone reacts with emotion and then someone tries to apply logic and then others, well, they like to stir the pot.

Racism is just a bunch of words. And if those of us that know and understand racism understand this, then we know we cannot be hurt by these words. But we have to be able to remove the emotion of the words to judge them. You look at YouTube comments and you see all the terrible things there. Half the time, it's some kid just trying to shock you or start an argument. He's not a guy in a hood. And while he'll probably grow up to be an ignorant dumbass, punishing won't work. He'll just move to another part of the Internet and do it again. Getting emotional won't work, since that's exactly what he wants. Quietly deleting his posts might work, as he's probably as lazy as he is ignorant. And he'll eventually realize that he'll have to be more clever to get a rise out of the Internet.

Quite frankly, most of the Internet is so full of unimportant nonsense, most websites aren't the places to attempt to make meaningful changes in race relations or in bigots' mindsets. But it is a place where free speech should be allowed. Because if everything is allowed, you quickly see what's popular, what's good and what's god awful. And I am confident that bigots will have to work extra hard deluding themselves if everything is allowed. If some things are not, then they can tell themselves, "Well, all the stuff I believe is just getting censored or else there'd be more."

Well, yeah, sure, in an ideal world. But we're talking the Internet here. It's a place where just as soon as you're shouting down a bigot or even just arguing over some political point, someone on the opposite end of the spectrum jumps into your conversation and goes at you the other way too hard. It's emotion vs. logic and a lot of people argue with emotion. Then someone reacts with emotion and then someone tries to apply logic and then others, well, they like to stir the pot.

True, the Internet might not always be a nice place, but I'd like to think there's value in attempting to keep our little corner of it nice. And while we may not get through to everyone, isn't getting even one person to question their ways in this matter a good thing?

Racism is just a bunch of words. And if those of us that know and understand racism understand this, then we know we cannot be hurt by these words. But we have to be able to remove the emotion of the words to judge them. You look at YouTube comments and you see all the terrible things there. Half the time, it's some kid just trying to shock you or start an argument. He's not a guy in a hood.

It may be just a bunch of words while we stay on the Internet, but if people continue applying such beliefs while out in the world it may end up harming someone, overtly (e.g. actually committing hate crimes) or more discreetly (e.g. preventing career advancement). While hopefully your hypothesis that it's usually just someone who hasn't had the time to learn yet or is just out to get a rise is correct, surely the former might be reachable through some calm words?

And while he'll probably grow up to be an ignorant dumbass, punishing won't work. He'll just move to another part of the Internet and do it again. Getting emotional won't work, since that's exactly what he wants. Quietly deleting his posts might work, as he's probably as lazy as he is ignorant. And he'll eventually realize that he'll have to be more clever to get a rise out of the Internet.

While this may very well be correct, as said, if we do manage to get through to even one person doesn't it end up being a positive thing?

Quite frankly, most of the Internet is so full of unimportant nonsense, most websites aren't the places to attempt to make meaningful changes in race relations or in bigots' mindsets. But it is a place where free speech should be allowed. Because if everything is allowed, you quickly see what's popular, what's good and what's god awful. And I am confident that bigots will have to work extra hard deluding themselves if everything is allowed. If some things are not, then they can tell themselves, "Well, all the stuff I believe is just getting censored or else there'd be more."

True, the change might not end up being meaningful, but hopefully they may end up being a small net positive. And do remember, I didn't advocate removing their speech (i.e. moderator action), I suggested challenging their views. Though as you said it may lead to an emotional flurry of words, hopefully some calm reasoning may also lead some to challenge themselves and their views.

We may not get through a 100% of the time, and if it ends up being something that happens daily, I do see that it will probably become too exhausting to deal with. Hopefully though, it'll be rare enough that it won't be daily occurrence, and maybe we'll get through to some. If so, I do think it may be worth it.

"isn't getting even one person to question their ways in this matter a good thing?"

Lead by example, not through punishment and self-righteous reaction, I say.

"but if people continue applying such beliefs while out in the world it may end up harming someone"

Words are not actions. Unless you're planning to build the Offices of Pre-crime, people are allowed to say what they want.

"actually committing hate crimes"

Crimes are crimes. Applying adverbs to them doesn't make them any more or less terrible. Hate crime legislation is the natural extension of people who delude themselves into thinking they can get everyone to think the same. And if validates the world view of bigots that certain groups of people need special protection. I'm all for calm words, if they are calm, but choose your battles. Someone suggested r/imgoingtohellforthis as one of those battles. I say, that's the wrong horse to bet on.

"if we do manage to get through to even one person doesn't it end up being a positive thing?"

If you end up validating the world view of dozens of bigots, then no. I've been on the Internet since it's inception and someone changing their opinion on it is an extremely rare thing indeed.

Yeah, I think calm reasoning can work. But be prepared and patient. You have to turn the other cheek even when it does not. That's something few people hiding behind an avatar can do.

Lead by example, not through punishment and self-righteous reaction, I say.

Agreed, if the situation can be resolved calmly all the better.

Words are not actions. Unless you're planning to build the Offices of Pre-crime, people are allowed to say what they want.

Agreed, people are allowed to say what they want.

Crimes are crimes. Applying adverbs to them doesn't make them any more or less terrible. Hate crime legislation is the natural extension of people who delude themselves into thinking they can get everyone to think the same. And if validates the world view of bigots that certain groups of people need special protection. I'm all for calm words, if they are calm, but choose your battles. Someone suggested r/imgoingtohellforthis as one of those battles. I say, that's the wrong horse to bet on.

Agreed on the crimes are crimes. I used the adverb merely to indicate that behaviour displayed online may (doesn't necessarily, nor should it assumed does, but may) continue on in real life with more severe consequences in this case and to not accidentally indicate that being racist online may lead to other criminal activities offline. :)

I actually mostly agree with the whole hate crime legislation point though. There should probably be good enough legal protections anyway so that specific protection isn't necessary. It just may be a easier stop-gap to reach in situations where that isn't true.

If you end up validating the world view of dozens of bigots, then no. I've been on the Internet since it's inception and someone changing their opinion on it is an extremely rare thing indeed.

True, guess it all again comes down to approach.

Yeah, I think calm reasoning can work. But be prepared and patient. You have to turn the other cheek even when it does not. That's something few people hiding behind an avatar can do.

Hopefully I'm good at that then & able to recognise the times I'm not so I don't engage. Or, well, I think I've got the patience down, preparation I'm less sure about.

Good luck!

Thanks! Hopefully it ends well and not in insanity. :)

If you're going to do that, I'm not sure Red Lantern is an appropriate avatar! :)

Oh, Red Lantern isn't my avatar, just the author of the snap we've been discussing in. :) I'm repping Zerg. :D