Some of my least favorite recurring comments on this site are the ones which boil down to “why are you posting this here?” While it may sound innocuous, it’s an attempt to browbeat some kind of consensus about what’s appropriate or not to post on this site. The idea behind the question is “I don’t agree with this and therefore don’t wish to see it.”
Yes, we get it - you don’t like (IGD / Tiqqun / people who are open to having sex with children) because they’re (liberal / red / part of the fascist creep) - the indignation comes from all sides, and is just as uninteresting no matter who’s expressing it when it comes down to “bad thing is bad, remove it from my sight.”
But in a way I understand the sentiment - there are all sorts of sources I filter out of my news apps because I see little value in them and people I filter on social media because I find no value in the content they post. I don’t find disagreement inherently interesting, and there are lots of views I don’t waste my time with. But I also think about how much of the internet (and, increasingly, society at large, anarchist spaces included) is designed around the filter, and how personalized space or space personalized for you a la services which shape themselves around what they think they know about you can lead to cutting out things you disagree with or find uncomfortable.
What are some ideas you disagree with but have found value in thinking about or engaging with? What are better or worse ways you’ve seen anarchists engage with controversial or repugnant ideas?