That's easy to say. But when there's a mob that will get you fired, get anyone close to you fired, get your kids kicked out of school (or worse, confiscated by CPS), and maybe even burn down your house for good measure, it's a bit challenging to speak out.
What is better than doing nothing is supporting those who have made it their life's work to speak up, and financially support them so they can't be cancelled - or at the very least, a hard target for the mob.
There's also some value in using an anonymous or falsified identity to speak out. This isn't a conventional war, and fighting it like one will make for easy casualties. I may not be able to share content on social media, but my "friend" can. Is the value of the message more important than the identity of those who publish it? Authors have used pseudonyms for this reason when writing on controversial topics.
This is essentially the polar opposite of the leftist's "silence is violence" - I choose to not tie my personal identity to saying what I believe not because I secretly hate black people, or that I secretly want communism to win. I, like many, just want to grill with my friends who may not agree with me but are conditioned to hate me on learning the horrible truth - so I only gently broach topics with them or avoid them together as hypnosis or debate team was never my strong suit.
Why it's (it is) Morally Reprehensible to Stay Silent
Maybe repost to gain more traction in new.
That's easy to say. But when there's a mob that will get you fired, get anyone close to you fired, get your kids kicked out of school (or worse, confiscated by CPS), and maybe even burn down your house for good measure, it's a bit challenging to speak out.
What is better than doing nothing is supporting those who have made it their life's work to speak up, and financially support them so they can't be cancelled - or at the very least, a hard target for the mob.
There's also some value in using an anonymous or falsified identity to speak out. This isn't a conventional war, and fighting it like one will make for easy casualties. I may not be able to share content on social media, but my "friend" can. Is the value of the message more important than the identity of those who publish it? Authors have used pseudonyms for this reason when writing on controversial topics.
This is essentially the polar opposite of the leftist's "silence is violence" - I choose to not tie my personal identity to saying what I believe not because I secretly hate black people, or that I secretly want communism to win. I, like many, just want to grill with my friends who may not agree with me but are conditioned to hate me on learning the horrible truth - so I only gently broach topics with them or avoid them together as hypnosis or debate team was never my strong suit.