No. It means that anyone who is not a hopeless ideologue knows that a just and humane society cannot be created on the basis of compelling people to assert things that anyone sane understands are simply not true.
Relevant post (relevant to this incident even, as a sort of "Round 1" from about a year or so ago): https://web.archive.org/web/20190228161939/https://slatestar... — best to read the whole post, but if not then look for the text around “scarily conservative”, the part from “very easy to moderate comment sections” to “your brand” to “dominated by”.
Thanks for sharing, this post is a perfect example.
> Some people think Charles Murray and The Bell Curve were right about everything. Some people think Islam represents an existential threat to the West. Some people think women are biologically less likely to be good at or interested in technology. ... Each of these views has adherents who are, no offense, smarter than you are. ... I disagree with most of them but don’t want to be too harsh on any of them.
These kinds of people should be kept out of "marketplace" entirely. The world is better off without blogs like this.
Thanks for making quite clear that you are an opponent of the Enlightenment, and wish to return to a dark age in which people were slaughtered for having the wrong opinions on religion, or anything else - "better of without blogs like this" easily turns into "better of without blog authors like this".
If you get your wish, you may be quite surprised when it turns out that you are one of those killed. Deluded ideologues who think they are virtuously persecuting the heretics are useful up to a point, but when they become inconvenient for those who are manipulating them to achieve power, they're eliminated.
