I attended an excellent conference on censorship in the sciences at USC this past weekend. Lots of great talks, but the worst talk was perhaps the most illuminating, as @jessesingal discusses on his Substack (link at the end of the thread). Stavroula Kousta from Human Nature Behavior Zoomed in to defend Nature's policies that encourage the suppression of content that could be seen to undermine people's dignity, & claimed this wasn't about the suppression of socially controversial results or something that offends.

With @glukianoff, @JonHaidt was 1 of the first to notice campus activists had reduced morality to an oppressor-victim framework, & that this was leading to psychological harms.

Another harm, noted here, is that it can be used to justify genocide, rape, & other moral horrors.

https://twitter.com/JonHaidt/status/1713885293806276649

It may be surprising that those who are so sensitive to the harms of speech that they equate speech with violence would be then be willing to defend actual violence, even extreme violence. But it's the oppressor-victim framework that makes this possible.

https://twitter.com/JonHaidt/status/1713885294901023010