about race, religion, color, ethnicity, and so on... It is all in our mind. Freedom of expression defenders would say, expression will not harm others, but what you do to others will. However, I would love to imagine, when the world is sterile, say people one hundred percent will not harm others physically, mentally, anything tangible, everyone upholds human rights, no war and no blood shed, what is left is what we have in our mind. If we think that basically Papuan people are slaves, but we refrain from slaving them around right now... I don't know maybe because the law says you shouldn't, because we don't want them to attack or us back, what would we do with that inert hatred in a sterile world? When all of our limbs are immobilized and human race communicates through language of the soul, no physical contact, what is left other than our thought? That is why I've always thought, the regulation "do not harm others" is for imperfect society, the society of "at least", society which is only responsible and only regulates what is tangible, what we can sense and absorb with our five senses. Of course we shouldn't regulate what people have in minds and put the Big Brother in everyone's brain. That is why government promotes education, etc to improve common agreeable term of what is good. To hold each of us responsible, even if we are not being watched by the law. But, Haidt said, "Reason doesn’t work like a judge or teacher, impartially weighing evidence or guiding us to wisdom. It works more like a lawyer or press secretary, justifying our acts and judgments to others." Yes, I am now still questioning the use of education and reason, honestly. Btw, if our mind still think what is different is bad, what happens is not genuine respect. It is, instead, talking behind people's back and progressing as a society in snail km per hour.