Also consider this, allowing these debates to happen, will ultimately be at the expense of minorities, the LGBTQ communities or whatever groups the bigots are targeting.
I am assuming that people that are strong proponents of swaying the undecided masses towards progressive ideas through debate, are actually actively participating in debates and putting their ideas into practice. Can you shed some light on your own personal experiences? When did you successfully sway fence-sitters? How do you gauge success?
Yeah I can't fully put myself in the same situation, there are certain topics though where discussion/debate does
hurt me to follow. But I can admit priviledge here. And I wouldn't say to a minority that it's your responsibility to debate bigots or educate them, though I don't see any reason why ethnic minority shouldn't challenge homophobia when they see it etc. But anyone who enjoys any priviledge, should call out, challenge and debate people who look to opress and discriminate. I wouldn't tell a black person to debate white supremacist, but people of color should challenge homophobia/transphobia and sexism atleast among their
own community if not otherwise.
Personally, I'm not a public debater, I don't get invited to colleges or radio and TV. But I do what I can among friends, family, coworkers and other opportunities I may have (like online).
It's sad to see the defeatist attitude of "nothing can be done, not worth the effort". As we can see even many good people at ResetEra don't bother to even call out (not necessarily debate) their own family.
https://www.resetera.com/threads/to...to-call-out-your-racist-family-members.82359/
Also simply calling out proud racists as a Nazi isn't probably changing them either, yet it should be done too to show it's not acceptable. But personally I'd go further than that and aim for a change through discourse. In both the goal is to have people self-reflect.
I'm sure I've never changed a full blown Nazi, but I've seen people understand some things, change their views or atleast broaden them. I've seen difference in their behaviour, I've got comments from others how they've seen a change in another person or how they've changed themselves. I've been encouraged to continue doing that. I've seen people go from not caring/bothering to start calling out BS themselves. That's my gauge for success, even if on a small scale. This on topics like cultural appropriation, generalizations, non black people using the word nigga, toxic masculinity, importance of representation in media and so on. So not saying I've reached someone who thinks ethnic or sexual minorities should be killed, but I've debated their equal rights with succes with religious folk. I'm not afraid to bring any of these topics up that I see as important, I don't try to avoid confrontation (unless with high risk to physical safety). But I'm not also the best equipped to challenge these things, I try to educate myself too and as said do what I can based on that. Sometimes it's just raising awareness. And I have no way to know if my online presence has affected anyone in a positive manner (or negative), but I can personally attest that even online discussions/debates have had an effect on me. Though I've never been a nazi, but still I've learned and understood to refresh my thinking and views (even when not personally involved in a debate).
The change of course doesn't always happen right in the moment, it's not just snap of the fingers to make someone drop their hateful views. And some people are definitely out of reach, I wont argue against that. With debating the likes of Milo, the goal wouldn't be to change Milo. But anyone leaning on that way, sympathizing with them or sitting straight on the fence atleast.
Like Jaffe said, nobody owns them a private platform (Twitter). But government shouldn't be shutting them down. Personally for me that comes with a caveat, they can go too far. Hate speech laws should be in effect, incitement of violence shouldn't be allowed either of course. Nazi's shouldn't be allowed to march in the streets under their banners, but political parties like the Finns party (number one with Nazis) here should be allowed a platform and I would rather have someone challenging them on that same platform. Some of them have got in trouble for incitement of hatred towards ethnic group(s) and "blasphemy", some I agree with and some I don't.
Please keep in mind that this post isn't specifically about Milo, but all the likes of Milo. (Kicking him of Twitter was fair game) Those who are trying to gain followers and even radicalize people. They will be spreading their word, either openly or hidden. Blatantly or with dogwhistles. You asked about debates and personal experience, this reply is to that. I can't do miracles, but I try to help. I don't want to just sit idle and do nothing. People with priviledges shouldn't be doing that. I should probably do more too. I think debating, discussion and influencing people is more important and more effective than just voting in example. I only get one vote, but I can influence others in how to use their vote too. Admittedly not everyone is equally receptive as already stated. And sometimes instead of discourse and debate with a bigot, I just flip my shit because I don't have the patience for them.
Edit: I just read an article where two feminist women watched the documentary Red Pill and commented on it. They noted how the film defined feminism and did it incorrectly. This happened because there wasn't anyone to challenge this definition. And people would be more likely to hear it challenged when it's through a debate, than a feminist blog in example. Many people who are supportive of the doc and it's message are much less likely to look up feminist speeches than to follow a debate where their side is also represented. Like debating Peterson. The debate exposes them to the opposite idea, of course this works the other way too. The article went over some of the points in the doc, so it also exposed people to it's messaging. But there also was dissenting voices over it. I have faith in progressive messaging, I have faith in what I believe is right. I have faith in acceptance and understanding more than hate. I don't see bigotry as something easy to defend and rationalize.
Edit 2: I also believe there shouldn't be any taboo subjects of discussion.
