The Real Reason White People Say...

SneekyNinja said:
So attempting to suppress Nazi hate speech is fascism?

It's literally people like you who brought Hitler to power.
Click to expand...
No, it's literally people like you who try to tell them what they can't say in a free country that support and embolden fascists to do the same.

I own sooooo much real estate in your head.

Desolate, wasted, worthless space... Utterly devoid of redeeming thought.

Sad.
 
Padawanbater2 said:
The idea of protecting free speech is protecting all speech, especially that which you disagree with the most, outside of breaking the law. One of the reasons America is actually awesome is that we have the right to say whatever we want without the fear of persecution from government. There are many places and peoples that aren't afforded that right.
Click to expand...
Germany has a free society now and they quite clearly see how those demonstrators endanger freedom, not enhance it. You might recall that when Nazis were in charge in Germany, there was no free speech. It's pretty easy to draw a line between the time when free speech is protected in Germany and when it was not.

What injustice were those torchlight parade "Jews will not replace us" Nazis marching in protest for? What rights denied them were they demanding be addressed? What exactly was the protest advocating? Don't tell me shouting "blood and soil" and "Jews will not replace us" pertained to protecting the Robert E Lee statue.

Shouting the equivalent of death to all Jews and a KKK torchlight parade is at this time protected speech. I get that. I was asked what I thought could be done to address racism and that's what I think. That's what I say. Free speech and all that, to me, doesn't mean marching down streets to terrorize and demand the removal of Jews and nonwhites from US soil. I support finding a way to legally suppress hate marches. At this time, we have Antifa to do that. It shouldn't be left to ordinary citizens to protect our freedoms from Nazis, our legal system should help too. Also, I will speak out when somebody like you expresses hate speech against minority person. Social pressure to suppress hate speech is another tool that ought to be employed more often, not less as you and tty advocate.
 
ttystikk said:
No, you linguistically challenged idiot, I'm defending the First Amendment.

I hate them and everything they stand for, a position I've made clear in every post on the subject.

Your attempt to assert that people can't say what's on their mind is fascist and unwelcome.
Click to expand...
A march that obviously was against free speech and ended in beatings and murdering peaceful counter protesters isn't protected speech in many countries that are renowned for the freedom of their citizens to speak out against injustice and redress grievances.

Sweden, which is hardly a totalitarian state, takes hate speech seriously because it eventually ends in somebody getting harmed or constrains liberty of minorities. As it did this summer in the US. Our system is not proactive and waits for people to be harmed before the justice system steps in and many times, not even then. It's obvious that those Nazis were protesting for the right to kill and deport other people and I see no reason why we shouldn't look at measures proven to be effective at protecting liberty from those haters as a way to enhance freedom and democracy.

Agree that the rally was protected under the 1st amendment by Supreme Court Rulings. That doesn't make it right, it just makes it legal. You don't support the Citizen's United ruling by the Supreme Court. Neither do I. In one case you talk as if the Supreme Court ruling is immutable, in the other you cry out for the injustice of the Supreme Court's ruling. Just saying, the Supreme Court can be disagreed with too and citing them doesn't mean "end of story".
 
ttystikk said:
No, it's literally people like you who try to tell them what they can't say in a free country that support and embolden fascists to do the same.

I own sooooo much real estate in your head.

Desolate, wasted, worthless space... Utterly devoid of redeeming thought.

Sad.
Click to expand...
histrionic meltdown
 
Fogdog said:
A march that obviously was against free speech and ended in beatings and murdering peaceful counter protesters isn't protected speech in many countries that are renowned for the freedom of their citizens to speak out against injustice and redress grievances.

Sweden, which is hardly a totalitarian state, takes hate speech seriously because it eventually ends in somebody getting harmed or constrains liberty of minorities. As it did this summer in the US. Our system is not proactive and waits for people to be harmed before the justice system steps in and many times, not even then. It's obvious that those Nazis were protesting for the right to kill and deport other people and I see no reason why we shouldn't look at measures proven to be effective at protecting liberty from those haters as a way to enhance freedom and democracy.

Agree that the rally was protected under the 1st amendment by Supreme Court Rulings. That doesn't make it right, it just makes it legal. You don't support the Citizen's United ruling by the Supreme Court. Neither do I. In one case you talk as if the Supreme Court ruling is immutable, in the other you cry out for the injustice of the Supreme Court's ruling. Just saying, the Supreme Court can be disagreed with too and citing them doesn't mean "end of story".
Click to expand...
Under the imminent lawless action test, speech is not protected by the First Amendment if the speaker intends to incite a violation of the law that is both imminent and likely.
 
SneekyNinja said:
Under the imminent lawless action test, speech is not protected by the First Amendment if the speaker intends to incite a violation of the law that is both imminent and likely.
Click to expand...
After Charlottesville, the ACLU has come out to say they won't defend right to hold rallies if the rally attendees are permitted to carry weapons. Maybe the ACLU are seeing the act of permitting weapons at a rally for hate as an imminent lawless action and so not defending it.

At this time, the ACLU has become the decider on this issue because cities don't want to get caught up in a court challenge.
 
Fogdog said:
After Charlottesville, the ACLU has come out to say they won't defend right to hold rallies if the rally attendees are permitted to carry weapons. Maybe the ACLU are seeing the act of permitting weapons at a rally for hate as an imminent lawless action and so not defending it.

At this time, the ACLU has become the decider on this issue because cities don't want to get caught up in a court challenge.
Click to expand...
It's the whole marching around chanting racist slogans and argubily trying to incite imminent lawless action that I oppose.

I mean when someone smashes a car into protesters it's not even "imminent" anymore, it's way beyond the standard applied by the Supreme Court.

Plus the First Amendment doesn't protect you from the consequences of your speech, it only allows you the opportunity to speak/express yourself in the first instance.
 
ttystikk said:
I think that if everyone quit talking about race, part of the problem would be solved.

Another part would be solved if we truly treated each other as equals.

The final part would be solved if we came to terms with the history of racism and took steps not only to prevent it from ever happening again, but also to ensure both that those who are disadvantaged are made whole and everyone gets a fair shot moving forward.

These points may sound simple, but each masks a great deal of complexity and divisiveness.
Click to expand...
@Padawanbater2 Thanks for liking this post so I could find it again.

@Fogdog @UncleBuck this is the original post, in its entirety. Chipping off the first statement is taking it out of context.

The point I was trying to make- poorly, it seems- is that a lot of people on both sides of any given racial divide deliberately talk it up to score points, rather than trying to solve anything. Y'all would be familiar with that tactic, considering how often you use it.

The sentence does not stand on its own in a vacuum. It only makes sense when the other two statements are also true, and we're certainly nowhere near there in this country.

I've had the experience of being eavesdropped upon by someone whose only interest is to twist something said out of context to try to accuse me of being racist without being involved in the conversation- when nothing of the sort was being discussed! It's shit like that I was referring to.

In no way do I advocate telling everyone to 'just shut up' about race. By itself that tactic would only serve to cement the divides that already exist.

Now, let's see if you two are men enough to accept your part of this manufactured misunderstanding- or if you'll just continue to prove the very point I was making.
 
Last edited:
No Lives Matter

I think there is evidence for this.

I support the Black Lives Matter movement, at least notionally.
It isn’t really a thing where I live, sadly
 
chemphlegm said:
anyone with testosterone I suspect
Click to expand...
see-this-shit-stop-it.jpg
 
ttystikk said:
Now, let's see if you two are men enough to accept your part of this manufactured misunderstanding- or if you'll just continue to prove the very point I was making.
Click to expand...
They won't. They'll continue to pretend what you said was racist and continue to bring it up in every reply as if you didn't address it here. It's the same thing they do with me with the word "fa*got". These kinds of people aren't interested in legitimate dialogue, they're only interested in pushing their agenda. You explained yourself here, taking away their ammunition for their selected talking point that supposedly adds credibility that you're somehow racist, they can't let that go, so watch. Mark my words, they will still continue to bring it up in future posts to try to paint you as racist to those who haven't read the original quote or this post addressing it.

People with legitimate arguments don't need to fabricate them to win
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top