Bigotry as defined by Oxford dictionary is:
“one who stubbornly or intolerantly adheres to his or her own opinions and prejudices.”
Today’s usage of the term goes far beyond that.
Currently it is a (poor) linguistic trick that guilt’s people into submission and, therefore, it is wrong and dangerous. Wrong, because it is not based on any objective principle that (usually) clings onto emotionally subjective premises; dangerous, because the only thing it does is de-platform any rational (or irrational) debate and prevent free speech from continuing.
Bigotry, as used today, is the verbal axe that chops off the legs of reason.
I don’t blame people for opposing “bigots”, after all who doesn’t like someone who has not entertained a new thought in years?
It is a very attractive political term.
And I’m sure most people think it is self-evidently honest, honorable, and just to oppose it.
But that is not the case.
Ironically, this term is used mostly (maybe even exclusively) by leftist progressives who, in many cases violently, hate anyone who disagrees with their political views. Bigotry has become an invalid concept that holds no meaning, but is used to serve whatever whims the anti-principled and subjective group-think of the left have.
Therefore, to be a bigot is to be someone who has a different view than the left because they deem it hate; hate, because they hate it.
Nothing more, nothing less.
The net result is that anyone who opposes them on any issue, in their mind, is guilty of hate, or, equivalently, guilty of bigotry and irrationality.
Step back and put yourself into the shoes of a so-called “bigot”, it would be rather hard for people to take you seriously and frustrating because you are now labeled as someone who is “hateful” and “intolerant”.
So why should people even listen to what you have to say?
After all, you’re a bigot.
You have no say here.
Linguistic labels such as homophobe, racist, fascist, or bigot does nothing to foster any true progress.
And preventing people from uttering “hate speech” does not destroy homophobia, racism, fascism, or bigotry. The only thing it does prevent, is people from being genuine. It is idealistic to think you can erase hate from a culture and foolish to think you can force people to not be hateful.
Censorship of “hate speech” breeds aggression and dishonesty in people.
Aggression, because people who are irrational are being suppressed – this builds animosity; dishonesty, because it forces people to act a way they would not, or do not want to act – this builds a counterfit culture.
In the end, the left regard their opponents as not just wrong or mistaken, but as morally evil monsters, beyond rational argument, that must be stopped by any means necessary.
Censorship is their way of not using debate to debunk views, but a confession of weak arguments.