|
sorry that the fbi stole your drug pogs that you were going to use to buy exotic untested russian chemicals to dull the crushing pain of being a white englishman
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 03:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 06:40 |
|
|
boner confessor posted:sorry that the fbi stole your drug pogs that you were going to use to buy exotic untested russian chemicals to dull the crushing pain of being a white englishman actually im a trans poc from Slovenia
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 03:12
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Public protest by a group such as the KKK, even including a cross burning, is not classified as intimidation unto itself. Hate speech is constitutionally protected.This isn't new, nor is it controversial. It's really, really not controversial. Hate speech creates an environment of intimidation and well... hatred, and is often a thinly-veiled call for violence against minorities. It has real impact on the lives of people and on the state of the culture. Just because we've chosen to ignore these consequences and basically made terrible legal decisions doesn't mean that hate speech should continue to be constitutionally protected. I feel like most people keep missing the fact that the US Constitution is in many ways no longer relevant to our understanding of society or law and is a terrible document off of which to base entire legal precedents. Also, I don't believe that moral license can somehow be revoked here... Pembroke Fuse fucked around with this message at 03:16 on Aug 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 03:14
|
|
|
Pembroke Fuse posted:Hate speech creates an environment of intimidation and well... hatred, and is often a thinly-veiled call for violence against minorities. It has real impact on the lives of people and on the state of the culture. Just because we've chosen to ignore these consequences and basically made terrible legal decisions doesn't mean that hate speech should continue to be constitutionally protected. I feel like most people keep missing the fact that the US Constitution is in many ways no longer relevant to our understanding of society or law and is a terrible document off of which to base entire legal precedents. Also, I don't believe that moral license can somehow be revoked here... Every member of SCOTUS disagrees with you. The alternative is worse.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 03:24
|
|
|
Honestly, we don't really need to be theoretical about violent antifascist action, which is why "if a nazi is afraid to leave his house another will take his place"/"they'll just get a gang of enforcers/bodyguards" are bad arguments because they're really not happening in actual observable reality. Most of the alt right aren't willing to pay the price for their politics, be it losing their jobs over racist Youtubes or getting clocked in the face at a protest.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 03:30
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:Then what is your argument? Because mine is that we'll eventually run out of Nazis to punch. Technically yes, you would run out of them, but that seems like quite a hill to climb. Are you only punching Nazis that come out of their homes? What about when some of the Nazis come back after you've punched them with weapons? How high are you willing to escalate this?
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 03:45
|
|
|
fallenturtle posted:Technically yes, you would run out of them, but that seems like quite a hill to climb. Are you only punching Nazis that come out of their homes? What about when some of the Nazis come back after you've punched them with weapons? How high are you willing to escalate this? So now the Nazis aren't infinite, but they are unstoppable.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 03:53
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:So now the Nazis aren't infinite, but they are unstoppable. They were never infinite, that was your own misinterpretation. I'm sure they won't stand a chance as you go town to town punching all the Nazis. fallenturtle fucked around with this message at 04:01 on Aug 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 03:58
|
|
|
You literally said punch one another appears, that means infinite unless you want to specify more, possibly break out some supply demand graphs?
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 04:12
|
|
|
fallenturtle posted:They were never infinite, that was your own misinterpretation. I'm sure they won't stand a chance as you go town to town punching all the Nazis.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 04:13
|
|
|
Kjoery posted:no, you definitely described some fantasia-esque infinite nazi dreamland, im sorry my dude Fantnazia? Nazasia? Hmm. WrenP-Complete fucked around with this message at 04:31 on Aug 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 04:18
|
|
|
fallenturtle posted:Technically yes, you would run out of them, but that seems like quite a hill to climb. Are you only punching Nazis that come out of their homes? What about when some of the Nazis come back after you've punched them with weapons? How high are you willing to escalate this? Storm some beaches, cross a river.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 04:24
|
|
|
Intrinsic Field Marshal posted:When the big guys like Sargon and Styx are exclusively on Hatreon it will be the real test of how things will go down in regards to Hatreon This is a fair argument for the amount of money you'd make. What it doesn't cover is the problems with scaling. When the gun nut (oh yeah, the site is run by the Defense Distributed dude) running the site is worried that the scaling is going to be an issue, it's almost 100% likely to be an issue. quote:They could just take donations of crypto-currencies in the end completely loving your statist final solution for dealing with them Watching a bunch of these alt right idiots get hosed when their crypto-currency gains/loses value at the wrong time or the latest bitcoin financial site screws them out of real money they can spend on normal stuff (child porn and drugs only goes so far) would fill my heart with pure undiluted glee. And again with the statist line. Can you just cut the bullshit and call me a cuck or race traitor while you're at it? I want to collect the trifecta of alt right douchebag insults today, and I only have 15 minutes left until midnight. EDIT: gently caress, how did I miss the Nazi reference there? Yup, private individuals deciding they don't want to do business with loving white supremacists is totally the holocaust, said no one but your idiot rear end. The market is in the process of speaking, and advertisers have figured out the alt right is a bunch of unemployed losers cranking it pirated anime. Shocker that's not a demographic worth chasing after. I thought a libertarian (otherwise statist is an even dumber insult) like you would understand and appreciate the workings of ration actors to gently caress over a group. rkajdi fucked around with this message at 05:01 on Aug 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 04:44
|
|
|
A better question to ask is, "if I see a nazi/white supremacist going off on someone in public, should I punch them?" Because yes, yes you should. Talking to them just results in getting your throat slit. Drop kick the gently caress out of them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 06:06
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Public protest by a group such as the KKK, even including a cross burning, is not classified as intimidation unto itself. Hate speech is constitutionally protected.This isn't new, nor is it controversial. It's really, really not controversial. Yes, my point is that even if this isn't legally the case, logically there shouldn't be any difference between cross burning and any other sort of public protest by hate groups. Either you consider both to be intimidation, or neither; you can't just arbitrarily say one is and the other isn't. Now, if you want to say one form of intimidation deserves protection as a form of free speech and others don't, that's a separate argument. fallenturtle posted:I don't like either of them, but the law has decided that burning crosses crosses (hee-hee) that line. Yes, and the law isn't an arbiter of what is morally right. In the context of this argument the question is "what is right/wrong", and simply citing the law isn't sufficient (otherwise you end up with a bunch of bizarre conclusions, since there are a bunch of dumb/bad laws).
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 06:06
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:hate speech doesn't give you legal or moral license to commit crimes against the speaker Discendo, you should take care not to conflate 'moral' and 'legal' in your mind. Remember that we're less than two hundred years out from slavery being finally declared illegal in the United States. That poo poo has never been moral. Still isn't. Is it legal to assault someone if they're openly delivering rape threats to a Muslim woman on a bus? gently caress no. Is it moral to do so? Eh, you should probably verbally explain why you're doing it first. That way the Pavlovian response kicks in and they learn not to do it again in future. Morally, you should always give someone a chance to back down. If they don't take it, it is correct to establish a link between talking poo poo and getting hit in the mind of the bigot.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 07:03
|
|
|
Kjoery posted:no, you definitely described some fantasia-esque infinite nazi dreamland, im sorry my dude Forer posted:You literally said punch one another appears, that means infinite unless you want to specify more, possibly break out some supply demand graphs? Yes, as in there's a lot of them not literally infinite. Why would you assume I meant a literally infinite supply of Nazis?
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 07:45
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:Yes, and the law isn't an arbiter of what is morally right. In the context of this argument the question is "what is right/wrong", and simply citing the law isn't sufficient (otherwise you end up with a bunch of bizarre conclusions, since there are a bunch of dumb/bad laws). I think both are morally wrong.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 07:55
|
|
|
fallenturtle posted:Yes, as in there's a lot of them not literally infinite. Why would you assume I meant a literally infinite supply of Nazis? Surely, then, there will come a time when the punching will cease, due to 100% of the nazis being punched. E: Anyway, we're fine with immoral acts which facilitate other, more moral acts, at least at a societal level. I wouldn't want the Confederacy to have won. That doesn't mean I think killing is okay, I just agree with the justification in that case.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 08:34
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Every member of SCOTUS disagrees with you. The alternative is worse.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 09:22
|
|
|
fallenturtle posted:I think both are morally wrong. Fortunately you're not a arbiter of moral truths, you're just a guy who is defending white supremacists.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 09:44
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/joeprince___/status/894052400792829953
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 13:49
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Every member of SCOTUS disagrees with you. The alternative is worse. The SCOTUS is bound to see legal interpretation through the eyes of the Constitution, an outdated and often-times useless document. Canada, Sweden, Germany, the UK and Switzerland are the alternatives. They are far more preferable to our current shitshow right now.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 14:18
|
|
|
Lotta folks happy to substitute their unexamined intuitions about the social ramifications of state-sanctioned internal political violence for any actual source of legal or moral authority in this thread. We're headed down the same track as the last one.Somfin posted:Surely, then, there will come a time when the punching will cease, due to 100% of the nazis being punched. Why do you assume that punching a nazi causes them to stop existing?
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 14:28
|
|
|
Depends on how good of a punch it is.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 14:31
|
|
|
The US has never in its entire existence had a federal government that you could consistently count on to correctly identify and choose what is hate speech. I guarantee that if the US had laws that prosecuted people for saying hate speech Trump would be using them to silence minority voices. edit: This is especially significant given that Trump has tried to use the law to get black people murdered before.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 14:36
|
|
|
I mean while violence is not the preferred solution, as I said you really should be more proactive than letting it get to that point, it's certainly part of a solution.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 15:38
|
|
|
Terrible Opinions posted:The US has never in its entire existence had a federal government that you could consistently count on to correctly identify and choose what is hate speech. I guarantee that if the US had laws that prosecuted people for saying hate speech Trump would be using them to silence minority voices. Yeah, that's why you set up an independent commission to do this work. Also, I feel like if the retort to hate speech laws is "the government is far too hosed up/incompetent/racist to be able to enforce this correctly", we really should be trying to get a new government altogether. In that sense, the defence of free speech is literally an admission of defeat: we can't expect the government to act rationally like it does in a number of other OECD countries, so let's just make sure it can do as little damage as possible. This is not an indictment of hate speech laws, it's an indictment of the dysfunctional incompetence of American society.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 15:52
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Every member of SCOTUS disagrees with you. The alternative is worse. This is a completely subjective position and you know it. Plenty of countries including my own have hate speech laws. Not only is hate speech illegal, but it can be treated as fighting words. So physical retaliation is completely ok Personally I like it that way. In my opinion, it's he American alternative that is worse. I can see no value added to society by allowing racists and bigots free reign to make public, thinly veiled calls to violence, nor give them a pass on targeting an individual for the same.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 17:00
|
|
|
https://psmag.com/news/on-the-milo-bus-with-the-lost-boys-of-americas-new-right#.x7pin3kltquote:The vehemence of the protests and the headline-baiting images of masked men setting fires and breaking glass represent a small win for Yiannopoulos: He gets to go on Fox News and play the victim. The rest of the crew are purely freaked out. One of the younger hangers-on has an anxiety disorder and had to fight down a panic attack that could have held up the swift retreat. Whatever anyone claims, it’s hard to shake off being run out of town by 3,000 people screaming that you’re a Nazi. It’s the sort of thing that gives everyone but the coldest sociopath at least a little pause, and most of this crew don’t have the gumption or street smarts to function outside of a Reddit forum. They’re not the flint-eyed skinheads that many anti-fascists are used to fighting. I’m not a brawler, but I’d wager that these kids could be knocked down with a well-aimed stack of explanatory pamphlets, thus resolving decades of debate about whether it’s better to punch or to reason with racists. You overestimate the modern white supremacist movement. They would love to keep this as an ideological battle, cause those ones they can control and win. poo poo like antifa and actual driven protest, especially ones that turn violent, isn't something they are prepared for. When socially declawed, the modern Nazis are a bunch of bitches. So we need to socially declaw them. Not quite the alt-right, but this was demonstrable during the Malheur Bird Sancruary Occupation. Remember how they were all expecting the True Patriots to ride in an parachute down, but then suddenly all their supporters had bad knees and other health problems? This will be the same thing here.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 17:06
|
|
|
Pembroke Fuse posted:Yeah, that's why you set up an independent commission to do this work. Also, I feel like if the retort to hate speech laws is "the government is far too hosed up/incompetent/racist to be able to enforce this correctly", we really should be trying to get a new government altogether. In that sense, the defence of free speech is literally an admission of defeat: we can't expect the government to act rationally like it does in a number of other OECD countries, so let's just make sure it can do as little damage as possible. This is not an indictment of hate speech laws, it's an indictment of the dysfunctional incompetence of American society. Hmm, an argument against American hate speech laws that finally makes sense to me. The country is too lovely to be able to defend its weakest and most vulnerable people, and the not-lovely people know it so don't want to give potential tools of abuse.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 17:07
|
|
|
I mean it is a correct argument but it does invite further questions.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 17:08
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I mean it is a correct argument but it does invite further questions. Questions like "why doesn't this apply to other kinds of laws?" By the logic used here, our entire legal system would be twisted into a machine for making GBS threads... on... oh. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 17:30
|
|
|
It's funny that many in the thread treat the recent surge in exposure of ethno-centric movements as a kind of contingent alien invasion which can be erased by simply silencing them. In Europe there's been literal neo-nazi/fascist movements like the Golden Dawn or the Front National for decades. The US also had a much bigger surge than the alt-right in recent times, that I see as a lot more scary because of the influence it in the mainstream of politics, as a libertarian/christian fundamentalist vein, in the Tea Party. It's both funny and sad how some posters here really believe that some tech giants banning these assholes from Tweeter or Youtube is gonna make any difference in the medium or long term, because the fact is that this trend (ethnic nationalists) is getting more and more common everywhere (just look at Modi's India or China's Capitalism with "Chinese Characteristics"). This liberal hand-wringing over laws and free-speech or whatever is pretty much fun and games, and all the anti-sjws feed on this, which amounts to keeping people perpetually entertained in pretty much scholastic and fundamentally irrelevant bullshit. It's no coincidence that many of the non alt-right shitlords come together under the "classical liberal" banner.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 17:57
|
|
|
Fados posted:It's funny that many in the thread treat the recent surge in exposure of ethno-centric movements as a kind of contingent alien invasion which can be erased by simply silencing them. In Europe there's been literal neo-nazi/fascist movements like the Golden Dawn or the Front National for decades. The US also had a much bigger surge than the alt-right in recent times, that I see as a lot more scary because of the influence it in the mainstream of politics, as a libertarian/christian fundamentalist vein, in the Tea Party. Galaxy_brain.jpeg
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 18:04
|
|
|
SSNeoman posted:https://psmag.com/news/on-the-milo-bus-with-the-lost-boys-of-americas-new-right#.x7pin3klt this. its a game to alot of these dipshits, hell most of these people are younger then me, late teens early 20s. they think its either a big game to troll the libs or are stupid as gently caress and slowly legit believe it. i sorta feel like many will eventually grow out of it and alot of the leaders will either start turning on each other openly or crash. trump is busy loving up bad and may eventually get competently hosed over either by his party, muller or most likely himself. Fados posted:
this. the mass bans and poo poo will only unite them and the libs only feed their egos and persecution complex by trying it. it might work to an extent but there will be a bad backlash.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 18:09
|
|
|
It's about pushing them back to the edge of the society. No one hasnt heard of skin heads
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 18:10
|
|
|
Fados posted:It's funny that many in the thread treat the recent surge in exposure of ethno-centric movements as a kind of contingent alien invasion which can be erased by simply silencing them. In Europe there's been literal neo-nazi/fascist movements like the Golden Dawn or the Front National for decades. The US also had a much bigger surge than the alt-right in recent times, that I see as a lot more scary because of the influence it in the mainstream of politics, as a libertarian/christian fundamentalist vein, in the Tea Party. Alright, what you're suggestion for suppressing ethno-nationalism and destroying the ethno-state idea then? The US is the closest, and we're still around a hundred thousand votes away due to the electoral college making decent urban areas less important.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 18:14
|
|
|
Major government investment in propaganda to spread support for integration, reform of land use to make people live together with different ethnicities, wealth redistribution to decapitate the wealthiest and invest the revenue in everybody else, encourage immigration combined with spending money to ensure new immigrants are integrated into the system both by supporting them against reactionary elements and supporting everybody else with information pressure to acclimate them to the idea.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 18:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 06:40 |
|
|
SHY NUDIST GRRL posted:It's about pushing them back to the edge of the society. No one hasnt heard of skin heads And again, depriving them of money. We live in a society that requires you to work to live, and if you're doing 2-3 part time scrub jobs to keep your head above water, you have much less time to put together your great rant about how SJW masculine women are ruining your video games with their cooties. The YouTube thing is big because of the demonetization more than anything. It's a way to starve these fools into compliance with modern society by taking away their alt-right funding stream. It also keeps more kids from finding them as easily, which is a great way to cut off recruiting. Pushing someone to the edge of society and keeping the boot down on them doesn't increase their power.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 18:26
|
|