> Vote in or appoint new leaders who do not give a damn about them. May backfire if too callous people are the winners.
You're literally talking about appointing a group primarily based on their quality of not listening to people; in the ideal case, they're callous.
The trap is that you'll really just appoint a bunch of right-wingers who won't cancel right-wing speakers for not being "politically correct" but will cancel every mildly-left wing speaker for being a terrorist or supporting terrorism.
The "listening vs. not listening to people" is a spectrum and while I think it would be unwise to pull the gauge completely to the side of callousness, more resistance against mob justice might just be necessary.
Currently, Twitter mobs have a lot of power, but none of the responsibility. This is a hellish combination, almost guaranteed to bring out the worst in people.
This needs to be reined in somehow. I am not claiming that utterly callous leaders are the solution - in fact, I made a "may backfire" comment right after my first sentence.
The jury method seems to me more democratic, anyway.
You're literally talking about appointing a group primarily based on their quality of not listening to people; in the ideal case, they're callous.
The trap is that you'll really just appoint a bunch of right-wingers who won't cancel right-wing speakers for not being "politically correct" but will cancel every mildly-left wing speaker for being a terrorist or supporting terrorism.