The Name of Love
Far Right Nutjob
Recently, I caused a bit of a kerfuffle in another server over my views on pornography and my social conservatism. In this thread post, I set aside the social conservatism for another time and focus specifically on my views on pornography. I believe that pornography is one of the biggest social ills in the modern world. Porn is as destructive to the individual as any drugs while being far easier to distribute; it undermines functioning relationships and religiosity, two of the fundamentals to a well-functioning society; it paradoxically promotes destructive egalitarian politics while promoting the sexual objectification of women; and acceptance of pornography is only growing.
Given these factors, I believe that only a coercive, political correction is the solution. I believe that Israel has shown the way their proposed anti-porn law. Their law would have ISPs block porn as the default, and if citizens want to view pornography, they would have to call their ISP to ask them to unblock it. This added difficulty would be enough to deter many people from getting hooked on pornography after having accidentally watched it as a child.
Though some might argue that banning pornography would also involve banning certain non-pornographic websites, or it might constitute some invasion of privacy, I believe the benefits far outweigh the consequences. I also hear people claim banning pornography may constitute a form of censorship or could lead to government censorship, but I believe this is confused. Freedom of speech developed as a way to protect newspapers criticizing powerful people from the resulting libel lawsuits. The teleology of the right to free speech, therefore, is to protect truth that is aired in the public square, not some vague notion of "privacy."
Lastly, there are people who will claim that my position is untenable because it's unpopular. You would be correct, my positions are unpopular with the wider public, but the idea I should change my position based on a popularity contest or how viable such policies are is highly problematic. To quote Edward Feser:
Another thing I should point out is how unpopular political policies have been forced on us all the time by the elite classes - mass migration policies and same-sex "marriage" being two such examples. This tells me, in fact, that it is the agenda of the ruling class that controls our political policy ultimately, not what we peons desire. In fact, there's good reason to believe our elites promote pornography is to control people. Ancient wisdom has long told us that sexual liberation is, in fact, a form of enslavement. Our government elites also promoted the 60s counterculture, as shown here and here.
In summary, my position is that pornography ought to be banned for the good of society, but the political prospects for that happening do not look good. If the political prospect do take a turn for the better, I think I'd like to hear your thoughts on this.
Given these factors, I believe that only a coercive, political correction is the solution. I believe that Israel has shown the way their proposed anti-porn law. Their law would have ISPs block porn as the default, and if citizens want to view pornography, they would have to call their ISP to ask them to unblock it. This added difficulty would be enough to deter many people from getting hooked on pornography after having accidentally watched it as a child.
Though some might argue that banning pornography would also involve banning certain non-pornographic websites, or it might constitute some invasion of privacy, I believe the benefits far outweigh the consequences. I also hear people claim banning pornography may constitute a form of censorship or could lead to government censorship, but I believe this is confused. Freedom of speech developed as a way to protect newspapers criticizing powerful people from the resulting libel lawsuits. The teleology of the right to free speech, therefore, is to protect truth that is aired in the public square, not some vague notion of "privacy."
Lastly, there are people who will claim that my position is untenable because it's unpopular. You would be correct, my positions are unpopular with the wider public, but the idea I should change my position based on a popularity contest or how viable such policies are is highly problematic. To quote Edward Feser:
Edward Feser said:Now, the dim prospects for short term post-liberal conservative political success can be turned into an advantage. Short term political calculation can make it difficult to think wisely about matters of political philosophy – and has done so with too many contemporary American conservatives, who trim the sails at the level of theory because of what they see in the polls and the ballot box. That is part of the reason so many of them have chucked out the traditionalist side of fusionism, and more or less become libertarians rather than genuine conservatives.
It is easier to resist such temptations when you have no illusions in the first place that your ideas are likely to have much electoral success. You can depoliticize political philosophy in the sense of focusing on inquiring into what is actually true, without being distracted by questions about what will play well with voters or be conducive to forming political alliances. And in the long run, when implementation becomes more feasible, it is also likelier to be successful, because the theory will have been worked out more rigorously.
Another thing I should point out is how unpopular political policies have been forced on us all the time by the elite classes - mass migration policies and same-sex "marriage" being two such examples. This tells me, in fact, that it is the agenda of the ruling class that controls our political policy ultimately, not what we peons desire. In fact, there's good reason to believe our elites promote pornography is to control people. Ancient wisdom has long told us that sexual liberation is, in fact, a form of enslavement. Our government elites also promoted the 60s counterculture, as shown here and here.
In summary, my position is that pornography ought to be banned for the good of society, but the political prospects for that happening do not look good. If the political prospect do take a turn for the better, I think I'd like to hear your thoughts on this.