LogFAQs > #913602917

I'd think such a microcosm exists if you live in a tiny rural village. If you're a big Internet personality like Jon and hold those beliefs, your ignorance stems from actively avoiding it, because you have the opportunity to do such a thing -- many people don't, and can't, because they are victims of it. At that point, you have no excuse. You're denying people's experiences based on your own lack of experience. I give the benefit of the doubt to a lot of people, but someone with very strong social capital that is both choosing to be uninformed and choosing to spread misinformation should take responsibility for the things they say. Whether you mean it or not, you're definitely negatively impacting people's lives with your comments.

And really, when is someone truly malicious? Most people hold beliefs because they are convinced they are in the right. If I was into eugenics and believed a certain subset of people are selfishly endangering the future of humanity with an inferior gene pool, am I malicious or merely misguided? I personally believe the current culture of condemnation or "cancelling" people as a knee-jerk reaction gets us nowhere, but malice or not, the impact is the same. Your intentions are frankly irrelevant.

Not that in the case of Jon it matters much considering he's still getting millions of views in the span of a few days. People can choose not to support his content if they want, though, and some rando judging Jon's self-conceit in the shape of extreme and harmful ignorance isn't making him lose any sleep. People don't like being confronted with accusations of racism and that makes them defensive. This is a cyclical argument on what is the best way to generate lasting change/awareness and we're not about to reinvent the wheel here.
---

.-#Elements of Water#-.