The reason this matters is, the ignorance we are up against is *purposeful*. It has design. It has intent. It has goals.
By engaging with purposeful ignorance, the goals of purposeful ignorance are achieved.
So, we mustn't engage. We should simply mock and dismiss it.
By engaging with purposeful ignorance, the goals of purposeful ignorance are achieved.
So, we mustn't engage. We should simply mock and dismiss it.
https://twitter.com/JuliusGoat/status/1382489749580087298
The goals of purposeful ignorance are toxic. The intentions are to harm others, in order to achieve a perceived personal benefit.
It's worth listing these goals. There are three main ones.
It's worth listing these goals. There are three main ones.
THE FIRST GOAL OF PURPOSEFUL IGNORANCE
To reinforce a reality, in which people with ignorant, toxic, and harmful ideas and intentions must perpetually be debated, which subtly insinuates that in matters of public policy they are the people whose permission must be sought
To reinforce a reality, in which people with ignorant, toxic, and harmful ideas and intentions must perpetually be debated, which subtly insinuates that in matters of public policy they are the people whose permission must be sought
THE SECOND GOAL OF PURPOSEFUL IGNORANCE
Through the mere act of debating the idea of harming people through deliberately ignorant means, to clearly establish that harming people is within the realm of possible and acceptable actions for a society.
Through the mere act of debating the idea of harming people through deliberately ignorant means, to clearly establish that harming people is within the realm of possible and acceptable actions for a society.
THE THIRD GOAL OF PURPOSEFUL IGNORANCE
To force people of good will to waste their time in a futile effort — time that might otherwise be spend fixing problems that people of bad will don't want fixed—and to waste the lives of marginalized people, as they argue just to exist.
To force people of good will to waste their time in a futile effort — time that might otherwise be spend fixing problems that people of bad will don't want fixed—and to waste the lives of marginalized people, as they argue just to exist.
By refusing to debate purposeful ignorance, you reject the notion we need these people's permission, which negates their entire project.
And protects their intended targets in a way that giving their enemies the honor of debate never can.
And saves time.
So let's do that.
And protects their intended targets in a way that giving their enemies the honor of debate never can.
And saves time.
So let's do that.
By mocking them and dismissing them, you establish a consequence for purposeful ignorance.
Which makes people of bad intent less likely to engage in it, and makes others less likely to accept it socially.
And that is how society changes its perceptions.
So, let's do that.
Which makes people of bad intent less likely to engage in it, and makes others less likely to accept it socially.
And that is how society changes its perceptions.
So, let's do that.
I've noticed that people of bad intent understand that this method is how to defeat them, by the way—which is why they try so hard to stigmatize it.
They used to call it "political correctness."
Now they call it "cancel culture."
It's a good idea, whatever you call it.
They used to call it "political correctness."
Now they call it "cancel culture."
It's a good idea, whatever you call it.
You can sort of tell the game, if you look for it.
It's why people of bad intent are never scolded to seek bipartisan solutions, for example.
It's just a different way of re-establishing the notion that people of bad intention are the ones whose permission must be sought.
It's why people of bad intent are never scolded to seek bipartisan solutions, for example.
It's just a different way of re-establishing the notion that people of bad intention are the ones whose permission must be sought.
It's why a narrow Trump victory achieved without a popular majority became in the public discourse a "wake-up call" requiring everyone to understand the perspective of Trump voters, yet Trump's massive popular vote loss didn't result in similar admonishments for Trump voters.
We don't need the permission of people of bad intention, and they certainly don't deserve the honor of our time or our debate.
We not only can dismiss them and move forward without them, but we must. We don't have time anymore to waste on their purposeful ignorance.
We not only can dismiss them and move forward without them, but we must. We don't have time anymore to waste on their purposeful ignorance.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
