Joel Mundt makes an interesting comparison (that never occurred to me) regarding the movement by Substack writers to force the platform to ban its small contingent of white supremacists and Nazis. His Comment of the Day also shows that COTD does not have to approach “War and Peace” length to be worthy. Here’s Joel, on the post,“Regarding the ‘Substack Supports Nazis’ Controversy” :
***
This year, a Satanist group put an occult display – I believe it was Baphomet – in our state capitol building, which caused no small amount of consternation among the solid conservative majority in the state. There were calls to tear it down, remove it…all kinds of stuff.
Our governor, a Republican, gave what I thought was a pretty good response: “Like many Iowans, I find the Satanic Temple’s display in the Capitol absolutely objectionable. In a free society, the best response to objectionable speech is more speech, and I encourage all those of faith to join me today in praying over the Capitol and recognizing the nativity scene that will be on display – the true reason for the season.”
Substack has some objectionable content on it…its own version of Baphomet? Don’t eliminate it. Don’t censor it. Don’t force it elsewhere. Objectionable speech should be countered with more speech. Logical arguments and cogent thinking are what give people the chance to understand why some ideas are bad when compared to other ideas. Forcing silence just makes the banished ideas more enticing. Want your children to be white supremacists?…just do what the Left does and attempt to kill the point of view without debate. That will make it super-attractive to juvenile minds that don’t know better. People who simply want to eliminate talk of white supremacy and Hitler and Nazis are those that are probably too stupid to rationally counter it.
Maybe that’s why the Left wants to silence so many different topics.
***
[For the rest of the story regarding that Satanist display, it’s here. JM]
Ethics Alarms 
Wow! Thank you! And thank you for linking to that follow-up article. If you all would indulge, I will add a comment or two regarding it:
After the man who wrecked the Satanic statue was arrested and charged, there were further calls from conservatives for the charges against the man to be dropped and/or for the governor to issue a pardon for him. As far as I know, the charges remain and the governor has not intervened.
Good.
The proverbial “turning a blind eye” to criminal behavior is something most of us hate when we see the left side of the political spectrum doing it. Whether it’s tearing down statues or torching businesses or creating a “zone of anarchy” called Chaz or throwing chemicals on Michael Knowles…or defacing a Satanic statue, all are crimes and all should be handled with equal adherence to the law. If we don’t want the “other side” letting crimes go, we should not do it, either.
Excellent commentary. The 20th century featured decades long attempts by authoritarian governments to censor and suppress speech and only let their citizens hear and read what was approved by the government. It never worked. People know that their government is censoring the media and, even if the real news is not available elsewhere (Radio Free Europe), one way or another news or glimmers of it make their way to the population.
When news is suppressed, rumors abound which often will be even worse for the government than the actual news. If you suppress posts about neo-Nazis (or moms attending school board meetings), then curious folks will hunt around and see if there isn’t something to like about neo-Nazis (dunno about moms, that might be a bit much for your average teen).