But I'd like to go a bit further. Let's imagine than 10 years from now all media is under their control. Would we be able to mention it or we should be censored because it's a stereotype? This is an extreme example but it shows how stupid is censorship. What about new stereotypes? Do we need a ministry of stereotypes to tell us which speech is allowed and which one is not?
We're supposed to have free speech and to be critical with everything. Every time in history when we went down this path of censorship we ended up worse. And every time the censors did it because they thought they were right and had a moral obligation to do it.
Replace <statement> with: "German are Nazis" "Arabs f#@3 goats" "Blacks are stupid" ...
Those are terrible things to say, your statement is no different. It is ignorant. It is a generalization. It is irrelevant. It is a stereotype. Moreover, it effectively played a key part in getting MILLIONS killed over the years.
I find it alarming that people are still debating whether this is a legitimate thing to say.
If you find more alarming a stereotype than censorship, you have a real problem. Actually we all have a problem.
If you're that worried about stereotypes, you should know that censoring them makes them true in the eyes of the people. Or do you think that people who are stupid enough to hate other because some stereotypes will change their minds once they see they can no longer talk about it?
I agree that there are unfortunately stupid people that this will make them strengthen their misconceptions. But IMO there are more stupid people who are going find legitimacy in reading such views in FB and mainstream media and that such legitimacy always translates to physical violence.
To me this looks more like "I'm going to censor only what my rivals say". Do you think they'll remove content that says "white people <insert stereotype here>"?
This is stupid no matter how you look at it. You can't censor. You cannot fight stupidity with more stupidity. And please, don't say again that stereotypes can end up with millions dead. What happened in the nazi Germany goes beyond that. You can't just synthesize hundreds of years of religious and ethnic problems into "stereotypes".
For a small glimpse, read:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_antisemitism#20th-cen...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_antisemitism_in_th...
Also while I can't quantify the stereotype's influence and subsequent effects on political bias, Islam antisemitism, etc., I believe it is as meaningful as it was in Nazi Germany and the death count could easily increase.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_antisemitism#Nazi_Ger...
To suggest that a disproportionate number of executives at CNN have German descent (just to be clear, I have no idea what is the descent of executives in FB or CNN, nor do I care).
So talking about the German-controlled CNN is just an important relevant fact for every discussion. Now, every time don't like an article I can just reference this "fact" that CNN are controlled by the people that also tried to commit a genocide and if someone argues, I'll just gaslight about gaslight.
Far from it. The Jewish people don't control "the media" or facebook, there may be a person that happen to be Jewish that have a role or a job somewhere. Mentioning the "Jewish people" in this context does not make any sense beyond perpetuating stereotypes and the fact that you don't even seem to understand this makes Facebook's decision even more obvious.