Ideas too Toxic for Wikipedia

Wikipedia claims to be not censored. As if to prove that, it has a List of ethnic slurs, including notorious ones that I avoid here.

But there are certain views that are considered so toxic that they are not permitted. Not only that, but people holding any of these views can be permanently banned from Wikipedia.

I am not just saying that editors cannot express these opinions on Wikipedia. If someone is editing a Wikipedia on tiddlywinks, and he expresses one of these views elsewhere, then he can be doxed and banned from Wikipedia.

Here is the current list of toxic opinions.

• That white people are more intelligent than non-whites.
• That white people are more industrious than non-whites.
• That white people are more physically adept or attractive than non-whites.
• That white people are morally and ethically superior to non-whites.
• That the various cultures of white people are better than the cultures of non-white people.
• That white people have the right to live in a white-only nation.
• That, in majority-white countries, a large majority of crimes are committed by non-whites due to genetic factors.
• That violent, abhorrent or deceptive actions are justified in the pursuit of these beliefs.

...

• That Jews present an existential threat.
• That there exists a massive or even global conspiracy to enrich Jews at the expense of others.
• That white people are being systemically killed, out-bred and otherwise forced into a minority status.
• That Jews are the true perpetrators of Nazism, or hold an ideology that is worse or morally equivalent.
• That minority groups are seeking to destroy Western culture.
• That the Holocaust never happened, was greatly exaggerated, or that historians have inflated the death toll.
• That the Holocaust was morally justified (or, if they deny it, that it should have happened).
• That the groups persecuted by the Nazis brought it upon themselves, and that the Nazis merely acted in self-defence.
• That the wrong side won in World War II (or, the wrong side won the Great Patriotic War).
• That Adolf Hitler was a great leader for the German people, despite (or even because of) Nazi Germany's innumerable atrocities.
• That non-whites hold back white progress.
• That non-whites intend to kill whites.
• That non-whites should be slaves.
• That white people are more oppressed than other groups.
• That non-whites shouldn't have basic human rights.
• That Islam or Muslims are the overwhelming source of terrorism.
• That groups of people should be wiped off the face of the planet, or systematically "repatriated" to the lands or continents they supposedly originated from.
• That Jews are responsible for the creation of communism and/or capitalism.
• That the concept of free speech entails the freedom to post or write race-, gender-, or identity-based slurs, insults, or the promotion and glorification of hate and violence, without any consequence whatsoever, and that any consequence brought upon them is an act of censorship.
• That the Globalists are plotting to destroy Western civilization.
• That there exists a Jewish or "elite" cabal as purported in any of a variety of implausible conspiracy theories, such as QAnon, the New World Order, the white genocide, or the Great Replacement.
• That the human population has an overall genetic quality which can be improved through selective breeding, often targeting individuals considered undesirable for sterilization or elimination.
• That disabled individuals or those with mental health issues should be forcibly sterilized or killed, as part of a so-called "euthanasia" program.

So Wikipedia itself claims the free speech right to post racial slurs, but if anyone else claims that right, he will be banned from Wikipedia.

Some of these are matters of fact. Some are opinion. Many are subject to interpretation.

These bans are foolish. For example, I certainly think that the good guys won WWII, but how can I hold that view if the contrary view is suppressed? The winners write the history books. My opinion is meaningless if I am unable to learn the opposing views. I often go to Wikipedia to get unpopular views. More and more, I use AI for that.

It goes on to say:

The very existence of a "white race" is a pseudo-scientific idea that has been rejected by the scientific community since the late 1960s – shortly after the discovery of molecular genetics.

It is funny how these people can lodge all these complaints against the White race, and then claim that no such race exists. Actually, consumer dna services will tell you your racial makeup, based on dna.