Why the hate for wisdom?

[anagogy]

I find people often call things "hate speech" when they don't want to engage the logic someone is putting forth.

It is easier to just silence people by labeling them, then to ask them to justify their logical axioms.

Silencing people, like some people in this thread are suggesting admins/mods to do just makes the situation worse, and is the true representation of blockage in my opinion and seems to me very fascist. If you don't allow someone to express themselves, and then debate their ideas, you're just stifling their growth (and your own) which is the opposite of truth sharing in my opinion. You don't change their mind, you just make it someone else's problem.

Having said that, if someone is just being unreasonable, and I'm not accusing anyone here, you can always just ignore and not engage. People always have to have the last word. I find most moderation just amounts to silencing people because you don't agree with them. It isn't acceptance, it is just controlling the situation. Obviously personal attacks have to be monitored, but as long as someone is just discussing ideas, in my opinion it should be allowed, even if you think they are "negative ideas". Oftentimes, I've seen people on this forum act like they're "nice" but it was obvious they were just using a thin veneer of positivity to disguise their own selfish manipulative tendencies. So the comments were allowed, but I found their ideas quite repugnant and negative in the extreme.

My point is, you can't always objectively know what is negative and positive, so thinking you can prune a discussion of negativity by deplatforming anyone you disagree with is narcissism in the extreme.