Re: More censorship discussion...

[lazlo%triton.unm.edu@lynx.unm.edu (Lazlo Nibble)]

deadman@garnet.berkeley.EDU (Ben Haller) writes:

>> I don't care about niggling "dictionary definitions" of what censorship
>> is -- if a shop responds to political or economic pressure to stop
>> carrying something that they would, under ordinary circumstances,
>> carry, I consider that a close enough cousin to censorship that the
>> difference isn't worth mentioning.  Labeling and ratings codes just
>> help that process along. 
>
> Well, as I've said many times the free market should handle your
> problems.  

The "Free Market" is an idealistic myth.  It assumes that both "sides" of
the issue are on equal economic footing, and they're not.  In the example
I brought up (Blockbuster Video), the "free market" is being trampled as
Blockbuster buys out more and more small independent video stores to the
point where they are frequently the only option available, and if you don't
agree with what they offer (or more importantly, what they *don't* offer)
you're shit outta luck.  Blockbuster is by far the largest chain in the
country at this point.  It's next to impossible for a mom-n-pop to compete
with them on an equal footing; they've got money to burn and if your store
is doing well enough, they'll just buy you and either shut you down or
turn you into another Blockbuster.

> Do you feel, when you choose not to shop at a store that has bad
> service, that you are censoring in any way?  How about if that store
> goes out of business becuase you don't shop there any more?  What if
> that store sells art?  Are you now guilty of censorship?  If not, why? 

Of course not.  Did I say, or even imply that?  No.  I said:

>> if a shop responds to political or economic pressure to stop carrying
>> something that they would, under ordinary circumstances, carry, I
>> consider that a close enough cousin to censorship that the difference
>> isn't worth mentioning. 

We are talking about a very specific type of behaviour here.  Don't try to
rationalize and dismiss my argument by painting it in ludicrously broad
terms that I never intended.  Censorship is the use of power to
intentionally keep people from access to specific ideas.  "Bad service" is
neither an idea nor something whose supression I'm willing to stand in the
way of.   

> If your foundation isn't firmly in "niggling dictionary definitions" you
> will never understand anything in life, and you will be doomed to make a
> fool of yourself, and be unhappy even when your dreams come true,
> because you wished for the wrong things.  Try thinking, it's much
> better. 

Take your personal invective somewhere else.  I've explained how I think
and why.  If you choose to ignore that it's your problem.

People like you, who are more interested in the dictionary-perfect
definition of the name of the problem than in stopping the problem itself,
are directly responsible for the erosion of our personal freedoms in this
country. 

--
Lazlo (lazlo@triton.unm.edu)

NIBBLE SAY ABANDON CATEGORIZATION