[calcifer]

> Staying silent isn’t an endorsement of the status quo.

If you stay silent, supporters of the status quo can simply say “see? people are happy with it; if they weren’t more would complain”.

So once again, neutrality is a myth and the only people who claim otherwise are those who are content with the status quo.

[forgottenpass]

>If you stay silent, supporters of the status quo can simply say “see? people are happy with it; if they weren’t more would complain”.

And their fallacious reasoning should be laughed at. Loudly and often.

The alternate is even MORE conductive to enforcing the status quo. When people have to be maximally political all the time, they either have to constantly deal with the blowback inherent to sharing ideas that aren't palatable to the status quo, or outwardly agree with the status quo (for convenience and/or safety).

If everyone voices an opinion (but not necessarily THEIR opinion), supporter of the status quo can simply say "see? people are happy with it; if they weren't more people would be dissenting"

[gowld]

> should be laughed at.

So you agree that silence is the wrong choice?

[nybble41]

Supporters of the status quo can say whatever they want; that doesn't make it true. The absence of complaints does not imply that people are "happy" with the situation, and silence is not an endorsement of anything. Anyone who claims otherwise should take some time to learn about basic logical fallacies.