5 ms·

I think allowing both extremes makes it clearer where precisely the center is located. Look at it this way - In a balanced system you can see how far each side

I think allowing both extremes makes it clearer where precisely the center is located. Look at it this way - In a balanced system you can see how far each side stretches. You're better able to understand what truly is the "extreme" and what isn't: LLLLLLLLLL <you> RRRRRRRRRR In a system where one side is censored, what you see doesn't change, but your perception of what you see is warped. The extreme L may not seem so extreme given how much closer you are to it. And even the mild R can begin to look more extreme compared to everything else you see. LLLLLLL <you> LLLRRRR Allowing both sides to speak without censorship may not have any impact on the actual L and R extremist, but it will hopefully have an impact on "normal" people and stop warping their perceptions.

tablespoon 4y ago
>> I'm highly skeptical that putting the extremes in greater contact would cause de-radicalization. I think it's more likely that would cause the extremes to further polarize and dig in for apocalyptic battle for the fate of the world. > I think allowing both extremes makes it clearer where precisely the center is located. Look at it this way - 1) That's not at all what I was talking about, to the point where your comment is kinda non-responsive. 2) I think you're likely basing your reasoning on false assumptions about the distribution. 3) The ability to more accurately label oneself one some spectrum seems kinda pointless. > Allowing both sides to speak without censorship may not have any impact on the actual L and R extremist, but it will hopefully have an impact on "normal" people and stop warping their perceptions. 4) I think the situation you're trying to engineer is likely to be alienating to "normal" people.