Why we must ensure balanced discourse for the sake of STEEMIT

From Wikipedia:

"Echo Chamber (Media) - In news media an echo chamber is a metaphorical description of a situation in which information, ideas, or beliefs are amplified or reinforced by transmission and repetition inside an "enclosed" system, where different or competing views are censored, disallowed, or otherwise underrepresented. The term is by analogy with an acoustic echo chamber, where sounds reverberate."

While not without its flaws, I like Steemit. I am also a libertarian. As such I generally agree with most of the articles that get posted up on this platform. I do believe however that libertarian/anarchist rhetoric is dominating the site, to its own detriment.

The politics section is dominated by the libertarian viewpoint, which as I said is not something I disagree with, but it is sad to see such a wasteland of differing opinions. The few differing opinions I have seen usually get laughed off as idiots or trolls.

The same goes for the Steemit section while there are productive arguments regarding improvements that could be made to the platform, there are far too many circle-jerk posts aimed at vote-baiting.

Like expecting a round table of likeminded people to be able to effectively find a solution to a nuanced issue, failing to encourage people with different views is hamstringing our effectiveness in disseminating issues through debate. In my opinion, the best way to ensure that Steemit becomes a stable and sustainable platform is to encourage users with diverse opinions, especially those with differing opinions.

This would encourage us to improve our arguments, and possibly even test our convictions. It would also greatly increase the pool of talent available to the steemit community. It would also make the platform easier to market to mainstream audiences, which would massively improve its potential.

The alternative option is that we live in an echo chamber, blocking our differing opinions and reducing our talent pool. This would not only reduce the quality of content, as rather than compete with ideas, people will compete to agree, it will also serve to limit the number of users that Steemit sees. Fewer users mean less money, a less effective platform, and a less liquid currency.

I apologise that the last few posts I have effectively been rants, and I am aware of the irony in some of my posts. I promise I have more “real” content in the works, it’s just been difficult at the moment with my workload. I am also torn between trying to put good stuff out there to improve my rank, or keep my powder dry and not blow all my best stuff before I am in a position to get recognized for it.

Other (less ranty) Posts I Have Made:

8 Reasons The Government Sucks
Free Speech in Politically Correct World.
Destroying central planning with a Banana