I don't see how protesting a pack of Nazis is "destroying the government". Even many government representatives have pointedly condemned White Nationalists, White Supremacists and Neo-Nazis.
Attempted what? What genocide? Oh I get it, because anti-miscegenation laws were thrown in the trash, all of a sudden your precious bodily fluids are at risk.
I'm just going to post this link again to remind everyone that "far left extremists" are a sharp minority in the committing of extremist murders in the US:
The long and the short, in 2016, the majority of extremist crimes were committed by Islamic Extremists, in 2015 the majority were committed by White Supremacists.
Tearing down all those statues of Lenin and Stalin doesn't make Soviet history go away. It's still there, in the history books.
The fact is that most of these monuments are not meant as memories to the tens of thousands of Confederate soldiers that died. They were put up explicitly to celebrate rebel leaders who championed slavery. Yes, there are some complicated cases. General Lee was ambivalent towards slavery, and believed it was doomed, but fought on the side of the South because he viewed it as his home, but monuments to men like Jefferson Davis were nothing more than celebrations of white supremacy, and played into the whole historical revisionism that went on after Reconstruction, that the Civil War was a righteous war of states rights, when all it really was was secession for the specific purpose of preserving slavery, once the US Senate became dominated by the Free States, and the strong likelihood that most, if not all, of the new states being partitioned out of the Western Territory would be Free States. The Slave States were losing the political war, and thus believed secession was the only way to preserve slavery.
And what happened after Reconstruction? The former slavemasters used every tool at their disposal to disenfranchise the former slaves, maintain them in an economically inferior position, and part of that was erecting monuments to those "heroes of the South" in every goddamned town square. And it was all done decades after the Civil War ended.
You have the right to free speech and privacy. But if you make your views known publicly, you can't assume you'll somehow magically be immune from the consequences. Want to be a terrorist AntiFa in your basement, go right ahead. Want to be a terrorist AntiFa out in the town square, then you have voluntarily surrendered your rights to privacy, and if your friends, family and employer no longer want to be associated with you because you believe socialism is superior and all the Jews and white skinned people or whomever is the alinksy-ite determined people to hate du jour should be chased off, well, that's tough on you.
You're not going to like it when the tables are turned.
Except that being a Nazi in most parts of the Western world are viewed as far worse than being an antifa thug. Sorry, that's just the way it is. I'm sorry your white supremacist beliefs make you into among the most deplorable human beings around. Maybe you should reconsider your hatred of minorities and your misplaced, and frankly idiotic. View.of your superiity, because what you really are is a pathetic whining snowflake whose misfortune is your own goddamned fault and not some Jewish conspiracy to keep you down.
You have the right to free speech and privacy. But if you make your views known publicly, you can't assume you'll somehow magically be immune from the consequences. Want to be a Nazi in your basement, go right ahead. Want to be a Nazi out in the town square, then you have voluntarily surrendered your rights to privacy, and if your friends, family and employer no longer want to be associated with you because you believe the white race is superior and all the Jews and brown skinned people should be chased off, well, that's tough on you.
Was someone talking about taking away your right to drive? It strikes me that the first place self-driving vehicles are going to make major inroads is in long haul trucking, and that has nothing to do with taking away your right to drive, but rather with firing a whole lot of truckers, and making shipping cheaper.
Automation is coming, and you might as well accept it. I can't imagine self-driving vehicles are going to be common consumer products in the near future, but in thirty or forty years, I'll wager there will be a lot of them in both commercial and consumer markets.
Save that even in Liberal Democratic countries, the limits to freedom of speech will vary. As I said, a number of European countries have some pretty sharp limits on "hate speech", and even in my own country, Canada, there's a level of hate speech which can lead to prosecution (though it is pretty rare, and usually has to be contingent upon the prosecution proving some tangible and relatively immediate harm). The UN Declaration of Human Rights simply does not have the free speech protections that the First Amendment does.
I agree, which is why I don't think being Republican is being a Nazi. I do think being a White Nationalist, however, if not outright making you a Nazi, makes you a pretty goddamned close neighbor.
And where did I say Nazis shouldn't be allowed to spew their hate? Providing they're not conspiring to commit acts of violence, they have that right, in the US at least (your mileage will vary in other countries). What I refuse to do is to normalize Nazi speech. They have the right to say it, and I have the right to judge them on their speech, and to act upon on my judgment within the constraints of the law (ie. not allow my property to be used to assist them in their speech).
When did I refer to Germans as Nazis? And you have a right to hold Nazi beliefs, but you do not have a right to be immune from being reviled for those views. That's what these "free speech rallies" are really about. They're not about the right to hold and express noxious views, as that right is guaranteed by the First Amendment, they're about trying to normalize those views, to make them socially acceptable.
There is no single "leftism". There are a whole series of political and economic ideologies that fit into the "Left". The Social Democratic nations of Europe are viewed as left-leaning, but comparing them to Maoist China or Stalinist Russia is about as sensible as comparing Republicans to Pinochet's Chile.
I don't recall CNN defending Antifa, and where exactly did the say ISIS was good?
The fact is that since before the Civil War, the phenomena of counter protests against racists have occurred. Some Abolitionists chose to be more vocal in their denunciations of slavery and white bigotry. Most people think John Brown, for instance was pretty naive and deluded in believing he could create a slave revolt, so his actions are condemned largely as sadly futile, but he still was on the right side of the debate. It's the same with Antifa. Their methods are counterproductive, and show a tendency towards the ends justifying the means, but their view of the evils of fascism, well, whatever their methods, I can't disagree with their views.
And that's where the attempt at moral equivalency between Nazis and Antifa fails. Both are thugs, but only one holds a perverse racist ideology.
That is total bullshit. No one is saying every Republican is a Nazi. The people being called Nazis are, well, Nazis, and those who associate themselves with similar, if at least publicly watered-down ideologies, like White Nationalists, are rightfully being lumped in with their more vocal ideological neighbors.
I do not think Paul Ryan, Ted Cruz, Mitch McConnell, or most if not all Republican lawmakers at the Federal or state level are Nazis or white supremacists (there are a few, of course, but a damned small number), nor do I think the majority of Republican, and in particular, Trump voters are Nazis either.
I'm not clear. Are you saying "Issuing a threat on a computer" should have no legal consequence at all? There's been enough incidents of doxing and online stalking and bullying to suggest that "threat by computer" isn't merely a bit of fun that should be ignored, and there are cases where such activity may, at least in a few cases, rise to the level of criminal activity.
No, by "Nazi", I mean Nazi. In other words, a person who holds a fascist, white supremacist ideology, who advocates for an authoritarian nationalist government that will ensure the supremacy and purity of Aryan peoples.
You know, like the tiki-torch bearing thugs who marched in Charleston chanting slogans like "Sieg heil", "blood and soil", and "Jews will not replace us", while making Nazi salutes. Those are Nazis, and while I'll concede not all the "freedom of speech" marchers in Charleston were out and out Nazis, I'd say if you continued to march alongside people burying pro-fascist pro-Nazi flags and shields and who were chanting those sorts of slogans, if you're not a Nazi, then you're either deaf and blind, or have a pretty fucking screwy moral compass.
Since when did being Neo-Nazi get downgraded to merely a "political opinion"? I'm fascinated by the efforts by some of the Alt-right and their fellow travelers to basically rehabilitate Nazism. I can't for the life of me figure out why anyone would want to defend, overtly or tacitly, an ideology that is based upon racial superiority and cleansing a polity of certain ethno-religious groups. This normalization of Nazism as if it were the equivalent of say, Marxism, has me shaking my head. Marxism has its flaws, dire and numerous, but it certainly is not a nationalistic or racist ideology, just a terribly naive ideology. Nazism, white supremacy and white nationalism, on the other hand, ARE specifically racist ideologies, and I'd argue they are all the same ideology, it's just that the white nationalists have learned to couch their white supremacy and racism in clever terms like "European culture" and "immigrants", rather than outright saying the Aryans are the master race and the brown skinned people should either be eliminated, enslaved or exiled.
There was essentially an undeclared war between the US and China during the latter stages of the Korean War. So far as I recall, the Chinese weren't directly involved in the Vietnam War at all, so I assume you're talking about the Vietnam War, where, y'know, South Vietnam was a US ally.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't see how protesting a pack of Nazis is "destroying the government". Even many government representatives have pointedly condemned White Nationalists, White Supremacists and Neo-Nazis.
Attempted what? What genocide? Oh I get it, because anti-miscegenation laws were thrown in the trash, all of a sudden your precious bodily fluids are at risk.
I'm just going to post this link again to remind everyone that "far left extremists" are a sharp minority in the committing of extremist murders in the US:
https://www.adl.org/sites/defa...
The long and the short, in 2016, the majority of extremist crimes were committed by Islamic Extremists, in 2015 the majority were committed by White Supremacists.
Tearing down all those statues of Lenin and Stalin doesn't make Soviet history go away. It's still there, in the history books.
The fact is that most of these monuments are not meant as memories to the tens of thousands of Confederate soldiers that died. They were put up explicitly to celebrate rebel leaders who championed slavery. Yes, there are some complicated cases. General Lee was ambivalent towards slavery, and believed it was doomed, but fought on the side of the South because he viewed it as his home, but monuments to men like Jefferson Davis were nothing more than celebrations of white supremacy, and played into the whole historical revisionism that went on after Reconstruction, that the Civil War was a righteous war of states rights, when all it really was was secession for the specific purpose of preserving slavery, once the US Senate became dominated by the Free States, and the strong likelihood that most, if not all, of the new states being partitioned out of the Western Territory would be Free States. The Slave States were losing the political war, and thus believed secession was the only way to preserve slavery.
And what happened after Reconstruction? The former slavemasters used every tool at their disposal to disenfranchise the former slaves, maintain them in an economically inferior position, and part of that was erecting monuments to those "heroes of the South" in every goddamned town square. And it was all done decades after the Civil War ended.
Oh bullshit
You have the right to free speech and privacy. But if you make your views known publicly, you can't assume you'll somehow magically be immune from the consequences. Want to be a terrorist AntiFa in your basement, go right ahead. Want to be a terrorist AntiFa out in the town square, then you have voluntarily surrendered your rights to privacy, and if your friends, family and employer no longer want to be associated with you because you believe socialism is superior and all the Jews and white skinned people or whomever is the alinksy-ite determined people to hate du jour should be chased off, well, that's tough on you.
You're not going to like it when the tables are turned.
Except that being a Nazi in most parts of the Western world are viewed as far worse than being an antifa thug. Sorry, that's just the way it is. I'm sorry your white supremacist beliefs make you into among the most deplorable human beings around. Maybe you should reconsider your hatred of minorities and your misplaced, and frankly idiotic. View.of your superiity, because what you really are is a pathetic whining snowflake whose misfortune is your own goddamned fault and not some Jewish conspiracy to keep you down.
Grow up.
You have the right to free speech and privacy. But if you make your views known publicly, you can't assume you'll somehow magically be immune from the consequences. Want to be a Nazi in your basement, go right ahead. Want to be a Nazi out in the town square, then you have voluntarily surrendered your rights to privacy, and if your friends, family and employer no longer want to be associated with you because you believe the white race is superior and all the Jews and brown skinned people should be chased off, well, that's tough on you.
For now...
I'm sure there were many horse breeders and carriage manufacturers who believed the same thing, right up until most of them went out of business.
Was someone talking about taking away your right to drive? It strikes me that the first place self-driving vehicles are going to make major inroads is in long haul trucking, and that has nothing to do with taking away your right to drive, but rather with firing a whole lot of truckers, and making shipping cheaper.
Automation is coming, and you might as well accept it. I can't imagine self-driving vehicles are going to be common consumer products in the near future, but in thirty or forty years, I'll wager there will be a lot of them in both commercial and consumer markets.
Save that even in Liberal Democratic countries, the limits to freedom of speech will vary. As I said, a number of European countries have some pretty sharp limits on "hate speech", and even in my own country, Canada, there's a level of hate speech which can lead to prosecution (though it is pretty rare, and usually has to be contingent upon the prosecution proving some tangible and relatively immediate harm). The UN Declaration of Human Rights simply does not have the free speech protections that the First Amendment does.
Now if we could only find a way to program human drivers to that standard.
I agree, which is why I don't think being Republican is being a Nazi. I do think being a White Nationalist, however, if not outright making you a Nazi, makes you a pretty goddamned close neighbor.
You march alongside Nazis, you get lumped in with the Nazis.
Here's a tip, don't invite Nazis to your rally, and when they show up, join the counterprotesters in showing your contempt for the Nazis.
And where did I say Nazis shouldn't be allowed to spew their hate? Providing they're not conspiring to commit acts of violence, they have that right, in the US at least (your mileage will vary in other countries). What I refuse to do is to normalize Nazi speech. They have the right to say it, and I have the right to judge them on their speech, and to act upon on my judgment within the constraints of the law (ie. not allow my property to be used to assist them in their speech).
When did I refer to Germans as Nazis? And you have a right to hold Nazi beliefs, but you do not have a right to be immune from being reviled for those views. That's what these "free speech rallies" are really about. They're not about the right to hold and express noxious views, as that right is guaranteed by the First Amendment, they're about trying to normalize those views, to make them socially acceptable.
In the good old days, the Allied Powers spent six bloody years killing Nazis and Fascists.
In a number of European countries, hate speech is lumped in with hate crimes. Try being a public Holocaust Denier in Germany or Austria.
Not every country has the First Amendment, and the UK has traditionally had more restrictions on speech than the US.
There is no single "leftism". There are a whole series of political and economic ideologies that fit into the "Left". The Social Democratic nations of Europe are viewed as left-leaning, but comparing them to Maoist China or Stalinist Russia is about as sensible as comparing Republicans to Pinochet's Chile.
I don't recall CNN defending Antifa, and where exactly did the say ISIS was good?
The fact is that since before the Civil War, the phenomena of counter protests against racists have occurred. Some Abolitionists chose to be more vocal in their denunciations of slavery and white bigotry. Most people think John Brown, for instance was pretty naive and deluded in believing he could create a slave revolt, so his actions are condemned largely as sadly futile, but he still was on the right side of the debate. It's the same with Antifa. Their methods are counterproductive, and show a tendency towards the ends justifying the means, but their view of the evils of fascism, well, whatever their methods, I can't disagree with their views.
And that's where the attempt at moral equivalency between Nazis and Antifa fails. Both are thugs, but only one holds a perverse racist ideology.
That is total bullshit. No one is saying every Republican is a Nazi. The people being called Nazis are, well, Nazis, and those who associate themselves with similar, if at least publicly watered-down ideologies, like White Nationalists, are rightfully being lumped in with their more vocal ideological neighbors.
I do not think Paul Ryan, Ted Cruz, Mitch McConnell, or most if not all Republican lawmakers at the Federal or state level are Nazis or white supremacists (there are a few, of course, but a damned small number), nor do I think the majority of Republican, and in particular, Trump voters are Nazis either.
I'm not clear. Are you saying "Issuing a threat on a computer" should have no legal consequence at all? There's been enough incidents of doxing and online stalking and bullying to suggest that "threat by computer" isn't merely a bit of fun that should be ignored, and there are cases where such activity may, at least in a few cases, rise to the level of criminal activity.
No, by "Nazi", I mean Nazi. In other words, a person who holds a fascist, white supremacist ideology, who advocates for an authoritarian nationalist government that will ensure the supremacy and purity of Aryan peoples.
You know, like the tiki-torch bearing thugs who marched in Charleston chanting slogans like "Sieg heil", "blood and soil", and "Jews will not replace us", while making Nazi salutes. Those are Nazis, and while I'll concede not all the "freedom of speech" marchers in Charleston were out and out Nazis, I'd say if you continued to march alongside people burying pro-fascist pro-Nazi flags and shields and who were chanting those sorts of slogans, if you're not a Nazi, then you're either deaf and blind, or have a pretty fucking screwy moral compass.
Since when did being Neo-Nazi get downgraded to merely a "political opinion"? I'm fascinated by the efforts by some of the Alt-right and their fellow travelers to basically rehabilitate Nazism. I can't for the life of me figure out why anyone would want to defend, overtly or tacitly, an ideology that is based upon racial superiority and cleansing a polity of certain ethno-religious groups. This normalization of Nazism as if it were the equivalent of say, Marxism, has me shaking my head. Marxism has its flaws, dire and numerous, but it certainly is not a nationalistic or racist ideology, just a terribly naive ideology. Nazism, white supremacy and white nationalism, on the other hand, ARE specifically racist ideologies, and I'd argue they are all the same ideology, it's just that the white nationalists have learned to couch their white supremacy and racism in clever terms like "European culture" and "immigrants", rather than outright saying the Aryans are the master race and the brown skinned people should either be eliminated, enslaved or exiled.
There was essentially an undeclared war between the US and China during the latter stages of the Korean War. So far as I recall, the Chinese weren't directly involved in the Vietnam War at all, so I assume you're talking about the Vietnam War, where, y'know, South Vietnam was a US ally.
That island you speak of hung one of the chief "sticks and stones" types at Wandsworth Prison.
Lord Haw-Haw