[anon_d]

We should encourage people to express dissenting views.

The idea that we should do anything in our power to avoid good outcomes for someone that expressed ideas that we don't agree with is worse than hateful and evil: it's stupid and self-destructive.

[sneak]

I do not think it is stupid nor self destructive to avoid enriching people who believe certain humans are more suited to being slaves than others, no. There is diversity of ideas and dissenting views, and he's free to blog about them, but I am also free to go work on other projects/communities that don't enrich landowners who I find morally repugnant.

Not wishing to contribute work to directly financially enrich racists and segregationists is very different from thinking that they should be silenced.

[creamytaco]

Wikipedia is pretty biased and far from an arbiter of truth, especially when it comes to summarizing someone's life, beliefs and personality.

A lot of what Yarvin has written is prescient and extremely incisive. Just because his views and models of the world do not align with the current cultural zeitgeist does not mean that he should be silenced or branded a racist. I get the feeling that most of the people that criticize him have not spent even 10 minutes reading him, but propagate regurgitations they've read/heard. This is not the mark of a healthy society.

[sneak]

> Just because his views and models of the world do not align with the current cultural zeitgeist does not mean that he should be silenced or branded a racist.

I agree. The racist things he's said should be sufficient on their own to illustrate his racism, regardless of any other controversial opinions he may have espoused.

I read lots of stuff on his blog as part of due diligence related to a referral to Urbit. Your claim makes it seem like he's simply misunderstood, or painted with a too-wide brush. I wish that were the case.

[dunnof]

He is not silenced, he can write all he wants on his blog and his ideas are available to the public. He is labelled a racist because he defends racist views, this is what he actively promotes. It might be against the zeitgeist, but a lot of people "against he zeitgeist" are not labelled racist just for being so.

[anon_d]

I do not think it is stupid nor self destructive to avoid enriching people who believe that Taiwan is a country, no. There is diversity of ideas and dissenting views, and he's free to blog about them, but I am also free to go work on other projects/communities that don't enrich landowners who I find morally repugnant.

Not wishing to contribute work to directly financially enrich Taiwanese nationalists is very different from thinking that they should be silenced.

----

I do not think it is stupid nor self destructive to avoid enriching people who use God's name in vain, no. There is diversity of ideas and dissenting views, and he's free to blog about them, but I am also free to go work on other projects/communities that don't enrich landowners who I find morally repugnant.

Not wishing to contribute work to directly financially enrich heretics is very different from thinking that they should be silenced.

----

I spent a years traveling and living in different cultures. "Racism" is basically ubiquitous everywhere in the world. Everywhere else, people (even liberal, educated people in big cities) are openly prejudiced. I found this shocking at first, and eventually came to terms with it. This huge stigma about talking about race literally only exists in one culture, and for this one tiny sliver of the history of that culture.

You are in a cult. This is a religion. You are condemning heresy.

[dunnof]

I don't see how replacing "racist" by "Taiwanese nationalist", "liberal", or any other qualifier counter the point being made : you don't have to work enrich people whose ideas you do not support if you have a choice in the matter, period.

[floodyberry-]

We don't agree. What is the best way to contact you so that you can start enriching me?