ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 14th May 2019, 03:58 PM   #1641
Sideroxylon
Featherless biped
 
Sideroxylon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Aporia
Posts: 21,485
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
I don't think they should make it illegal, which is what was being suggested.

There are other courses of action that the government can take in certain circumstances. For example, visas can be denied to foreign nationals, and I would have no trouble with doing that for Nazis either. Politicians can also publicly state opposition to their message, that's not different for Nazis either. Complete passivity isn't the only alternative to outlawing something.
Do you believe that hate preaching can incite people to acts of terrorism? The suggestion that hate preachers who are foreign nationals might be denied visas suggests to me you believe some kind of risk exists. What are the certain circumstances? Why limit access to free speech to foreign nationals only?

I think leaders should publicly and unambiguously speak out against hate speech. However, it seems to me that where there is a vacuum in leadership and laws, protest actions like egging someone seems on the table.

I believe that speech that denies the dignity of others should be not only be spoken out on but also legislated against. It is unacceptable in a society in which all members have an equal right to dignity until they deny the same of any other member. In saying this I recognise the impossibility of absolute consistency in socially constructed laws/concepts, and deny the possibility of foundationalsim in same.

We just simply cannot have people who flaunt symbols of genocide while preaching white supremacy. This is an affront to the dignity of Jews. When a hate preaching imam does it, it is a denial of the dignity of all outside his narrow worldview. Stripping another of their human dignity is a track to genocide. Not a sufficient condition for committing genocide but maybe a necessary one.
__________________
'The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool.' - Richard Feynman

Last edited by Sideroxylon; 14th May 2019 at 04:19 PM.
Sideroxylon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2019, 04:01 PM   #1642
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 38,250
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
I believe that advocating murder or racial violence constitutes incitement.



I also believe that indoctrinating your audience with a mythology that they themselves are being systematically exterminated by a conspiracy of Jews, or any other ethnic group, constitutes incitement.







I disagree; I think that you're stressing a distinction between these two that is not a meaningful difference, and should not be treated like one. I do not believe that people advocating murder or ethnic cleansing earn a proverbial get-out-of-jail-free card by carefully saying "the government should" instead of "we should". The implication either way is that we undertake mass murder or racial violence; whether we do it with our own hands or by hiring a new government expressly to do it on our behalf is, in the end, a purely academic distinction. Those particular ends make the means irrelevant.
The distinction is important to me here because Darat has claimed that several organizations have been outlawed in the US for disseminating ideas.

These are legal matters, and I would like to be clear about what exactly has been done in under US law in the cases Darat is referring to.

I'm not disputing your idea of incitement generally. I'm saying that you can't petition a judge to impose the legal sanctions for incitement, on actions that don't meet the legal definition of incitement.

And I'm asking Darat to provide an example of the kind of legal sanctions that he has in mind, for such groups as we are talking about here.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2019, 04:17 PM   #1643
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 24,283
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Incitement and advocacy might not mean exactly the same thing, but they can be two sides of the same coin.

If I incite you to kill Jews, then there is no question that I am also advocating for you to do so.

If I advocate the killing of Jews, I may or may not be inciting you to do so; it will depend on exactly what I say and how I am advocating it.
I honestly believe you have that exactly backwards.

I think it is possible to incite violence without strictly asking for violence in so many words. For instance, claiming simply that the white race is facing extermination at the hands of a Jewish clique, can incite violence. It is a reasonably-foreseeable consequence of making that claim that some people who believe it will reason that a violent resistance is necessary to ensure their survival and act on that belief. By their own words, both the Poway and the Pittsburgh synagogue terrorists were incited to carry out those attacks by the "white replacement" conspiracy theory, which in itself does not suggest a course of action but merely promotes the existence of the threat. To a lesser extent, I think it's even possible to unintentionally incite violence; I'm sure the jury did not intend to incite the 1992 LA riot by finding the police not-guilty of their gratuitous beating of Rodney King; but an argument can be made the verdict incited that riot (although I'll concede this point is debatable and should not detract from the more pertinent argument before it).

On the other hand, I don't think it's possible to advocate murder or racial violence without also inciting it. "This is the god-fearing White Man's land and all the Jews/liberals/gays/atheists/brown-folk need to be rounded up and shot/deported/otherwise removed from our presence or disposed of" necessarily carries a reasonably-foreseeable risk that someone who thinks that's a swell idea will take positive action to realize that goal. A speaker employing a little CYA by intoning that "we need to elect a government to kill or imprison all these people for us" isn't doing anything to abrogate the risk, because 1) some of the audience will recognize or interpret CYA for what it is, a wink-and-nod for deniability purposes, in which case the real message doesn't change; and 2) even if it is not interpreted as a CYA clause, the urgent impetus for action implied by the language of the rest of the propaganda remains the same and some will get tired of waiting. Returning to the Poway synagogue shooter once again; in his manifesto, he very clearly reasons that waiting for the electoral process to place enough power in the hands of the white nationalists so that change can be brought about without personal violence on the part of white individuals is a self-defeating strategy that will leave White Europeans extinct before the effort can possibly come to fruition, thus justifying the violent acts of personal resistance anyway.
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2019, 05:05 PM   #1644
luchog
Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist
 
luchog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Emerald City
Posts: 15,951
Originally Posted by Sideroxylon View Post
I think leaders should publicly and unambiguously speak out against hate speech. However, it seems to me that where there is a vacuum in leadership and laws, protest actions like egging someone seems on the table.

And there we have it in a nutshell.

That's been the biggest problem in the US, for certain. The government has not only failed to speak out against hate, against violence committed by hate groups, time and time again; but in many causes it has condoned and supported those hate groups, and continues to do so (after all, they're fine people). It has itself committed hate crimes against its own citizens, not to mention its long and brutal history of hate crimes against indigenous peoples and immigrants.

Under those circumstances, protest actions like marches, sit-ins, and postering campaings are fully warranted. And when those fail to motivate appropriate action by the authorities; then escalation to egging, pieing, blockading, and similar actions of minimal force to express resistance to the expressions of hatred. Escalating as appropriate to the circumstances and the threat. If the threat escalates, and one cannot count on the government for protection (or they tacitly or openly condone and support hate-based violence), resisting force with force, asserting civil rights with civil disobedience, and forceful self-defense against the clear and present threat. The history of the Civil Rights Movement from Rosa Parks to Dr. King to the Black Panther Party is a good example.

Quote:
Stripping another of their human dignity is a track to genocide. Not a sufficient condition for committing genocide but maybe a necessary one.

Depersonalizing an opponent is a necessary and essential step to developing the ability to kill them. At least, that's what I learned in my military training (they don't call it that, but that's very much what it is). Dehumanizing them is essential to taking that further, to the point of oppression, massacre, and genocide. It certainly enabled the US to massacre the First Nations peoples, and enslave African peoples; it was part and parcel of the mass murder of Congo peoples by Belgian colonialists; and of Indian peoples by the British. It has been part and parcel of any doctrine that has called for the elimination of any "undesirable" peoples. The more extreme the doctrine, the more extreme the dehumanization.

It's a lot easier to oppress and kill hundreds or thousands or millions of people when you stop thinking of them as fellow human beings, with similar desires and fears and hopes; and start thinking of them as sub-human animals or inhuman monsters.
__________________
When you say that fascists should only be defeated through debate, what you're really saying is that the marginalized and vulnerable should have to endlessly argue for their right to exist; and at no point should they ever be fully accepted, and the debate considered won.

Last edited by luchog; 14th May 2019 at 05:14 PM.
luchog is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2019, 05:22 PM   #1645
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 38,250
Originally Posted by Sideroxylon View Post

We just simply cannot have people who flaunt symbols of genocide while preaching white supremacy. This is an affront to the dignity of Jews.
What do Jews actually say?

Nazism is illegal in Germany. Is that what you're proposing? Is that what actual Jews are demanding?
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2019, 06:05 PM   #1646
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Currently Dismembered
Posts: 8,417
Originally Posted by luchog View Post
Yes.




You're the one being slow here. Go back and re-read the thread, paying particular attention to Thermal's contributions. I'll wait.

One of the most prominent themes throughout this and related threads is that neo-Nazis are No True Nazis, but are just edgelords playacting and being deliberately controversial/offensive without actually believing any of the tenets of Naziism; and therefore they are not a real threat to anyone (despite a number of mass-murders perpetrated by neo-Nazis), and anyone who treats the as a threat are pearl-clutching alarmists, and as such are the real fascists for trying to repress the neo-Nazi's free speech.




But will ardently defend the (no true) neo-Nazi's right to disrupt the Holocaust Memorial with their advocating for the mass-murder of undesirables.
Why you dragging me back into this? I bailed smh ten pages ago, and others have voiced identical or more extreme positions.

My 'contribution' was that there are a spectrum of Nazi/neo-nazi/white nationalist/assorted ***wipe beliefs, being painted by you and others with the same genocidal brush. I honestly can't tell if you don't understand that, or choose not to.

The problem with a twat like Jovi Val is that when he stands on a corner wearing a silly costume and a swastika necklace, you can't tell if he advocates murder or is just an ***wipe with a nazi fetish. Making birthday cakes, while saying nothing about killing, makes me think he is in the fetish camp, rather than the actually dangerous group.

If you want to advocate assaulting actually dangerous people...well, that's pretty stupid. If you advocate assaulting cheesy little ***wipes...well, that's pretty petty. And that's my argument, as others have proposed: there is no reasonably good end to this. It's just different degrees of a bad idea.
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2019, 09:03 PM   #1647
Sideroxylon
Featherless biped
 
Sideroxylon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Aporia
Posts: 21,485
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
What do Jews actually say?

Nazism is illegal in Germany. Is that what you're proposing? Is that what actual Jews are demanding?
We have had some Jews offer their opinion in this thread. Is it difficult to imagine what it would be like to be a member of a ethnic/religious group that has been the target of hatred, conspiracies and the Holocaust? What are the different ways you might feel in reaction to someone who flaunted the symbols of the Holocaust while expressing white supremacist messages?

Beyond that, is it not reasonable to believe that the propagation of such lies and hate will lead to more people who act on them in many ways from snatching a kippah, graffiti on a jewish business, firebombs or shootings? These are unhealthy ideas for our societies.

I think Australia is moving in the right direction in legislating against hate speech but there does seem to be a vacuum that is filled by social media and, reflexively, corporate reactions to hate crimes when they are discovered posted on the internet or caught on camera.
__________________
'The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool.' - Richard Feynman
Sideroxylon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th May 2019, 02:21 AM   #1648
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 85,000
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Nazis want to kill millions of your fellow citizens, you do not want to kill vegans.

Does that help you understand the difference?
My apologies. I didn't realise you have no understanding of analogies and parallels. I'll try to remember that next time I try to dumb things down.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th May 2019, 03:04 AM   #1649
Roboramma
Penultimate Amazing
 
Roboramma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 12,901
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Quote:
Here's an example: I'm a meat-eater. It is my opinion that vegans are willy to exclude meat from their diets.



In what way would the above be an incitement for vegans to eat meat?
Nazis want to kill millions of your fellow citizens, you do not want to kill vegans.

Does that help you understand the difference?
When an analogy is presented, there are aspects of the thing that are analogous and aspects that are not. In order to understand the analogy it's necessary to map the analogous aspects from one case on to the other while ignoring the rest of the baggage that isn't analogous.

In the above analogy, Belz is noting that his having an opinion that Vegans should eat meat is not inciting them to eat meat. Analogously a Nazi's opinion, if he in fact holds this opinion, that all Jews should be killed is not an incitement for you to kill them.

If you think that it is incitement in one case but not the other, it would be helpful for you to explain where the analogy breaks down with respect to this aspect of it.

Thanks.
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov
Roboramma is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th May 2019, 03:09 AM   #1650
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 47,866
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Espousing Nazism is espousing incitement to kill millions of our fellow citizens, that's what Nazism is. So it may be that at a particular time the victim of the assault of egging isn't on a soapbox shouting "kill your fellow citizens", they may be for example shouting about enslaving inferior races, but their goals don't change so the inference is based on sound reasoning. (Not that Nazis should be egged.)
But that isn't against american laws. It is only illegal to call for specific crimes, not general polices like killing all the gays.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th May 2019, 04:04 AM   #1651
dann
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 8,745
Originally Posted by Roboramma View Post
In the above analogy, Belz is noting that his having an opinion that Vegans should eat meat is not inciting them to eat meat. Analogously a Nazi's opinion, if he in fact holds this opinion, that all Jews should be killed is not an incitement for you to kill them.

If somebody says that named politicians should be killed, nobody will consider it an incitement to kill them, right?! And if somebody says that vegans should be forced to eat meat, nobody would consider it an incitement to force-feed them with meat products or mix meat into their diet in other ways. (The latter analogy is much better than Belz's.)

You should get more exercise really isn't analogous to the Jews should be gassed at all.
__________________
/dann
"Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx
dann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th May 2019, 04:08 AM   #1652
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 38,250
I tried to warn you.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th May 2019, 04:13 AM   #1653
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 85,000
Originally Posted by dann View Post
If somebody says that named politicians should be killed, nobody will consider it an incitement to kill them, right?!
As usual, it depends on context. If made on air asking people to go out and do it, sure. If it's a comment made over dinner with friends, probably not. Hopefully the person in question will get nasty looks from said friends, and maybe even a slap upside the head.

Roboramma made a small mistake, however. It wasn't my opinion that they should eat meat, in the analogy, but that they were silly (I wrote "willy" by mistake) to not do so.

Quote:
And if somebody says that vegans should be forced to eat meat, nobody would consider it an incitement to force-feed them with meat products or mix meat into their diet in other ways.
Why are you deliberately changing the parameters of the analogy? No one said anything about forcing them. The point of the analogy is the relationship between opinion and incitement. Perhaps you should try to understand the analogy and how it applies, rather than knee-jerk attempt to hand-wave it away because you don't like where it leads.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward



Last edited by Belz...; 15th May 2019 at 05:19 AM.
Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th May 2019, 05:18 AM   #1654
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 38,250
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Yet in the USA other groups are made illegal for disseminating such ideas and that is fine
Please give an example of such a group.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th May 2019, 05:20 AM   #1655
Roboramma
Penultimate Amazing
 
Roboramma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 12,901
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Roboramma made a small mistake, however. It wasn't my opinion that they should eat meat, in the analogy, but that they were silly (I wrote "willy" by mistake) to not do so.
Thanks for the correction.
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov
Roboramma is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th May 2019, 05:27 AM   #1656
Sideroxylon
Featherless biped
 
Sideroxylon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Aporia
Posts: 21,485
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I tried to warn you.
I read it again today.
__________________
'The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool.' - Richard Feynman
Sideroxylon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th May 2019, 06:28 AM   #1657
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 87,589
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Please give an example of such a group.
There's a page on the USA Gov site that lists some of them, not got it bookmarked at the moment I'll try and find it again and post it.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th May 2019, 06:53 AM   #1658
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 38,250
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
There's a page on the USA Gov site that lists some of them, not got it bookmarked at the moment I'll try and find it again and post it.
Sounds good. I'm looking forward to it.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th May 2019, 10:58 AM   #1659
CaptainHowdy
Graduate Poster
 
CaptainHowdy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,291
Originally Posted by Sideroxylon View Post
We have had some Jews offer their opinion in this thread. Is it difficult to imagine what it would be like to be a member of a ethnic/religious group that has been the target of hatred, conspiracies and the Holocaust? What are the different ways you might feel in reaction to someone who flaunted the symbols of the Holocaust while expressing white supremacist messages?
The same way Christians might feel in reaction to people displaying inverted cross and pentagrams while expressing denial of the resurrection. Or maybe the way Muslims feel when you show them a drawing of Mohammed. Part of living in a diverse multicultural world is being confronted with images and ideas you will find distasteful and learning to accept them. Most Jews are mature enough to understand that others who don't accept all of their most cherished beliefs are not an existential threat. Some Jews might react with blind rage if they see the footprint of the Buddha but every religion has it's share of the crazies. That still doesn't give them the right to throw eggs.
CaptainHowdy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th May 2019, 11:33 AM   #1660
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 24,283
Originally Posted by CaptainHowdy View Post
The same way Christians might feel in reaction to people displaying inverted cross and pentagrams while expressing denial of the resurrection.
No; someone advocating for the wholesale murder of you and all your relatives is not like "someone displaying an inverted cross and pentagrams" and claiming their religious views are more correct than yours. That's a laughably preposterous comparison.

The right of people not to be genocided is not some "cherished belief" that it's normal for different people to not accept; and someone calling for your murder is by definition an existential threat - how could it possibly not be?
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002

Last edited by Checkmite; 15th May 2019 at 11:35 AM.
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th May 2019, 01:58 PM   #1661
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 44,154
Originally Posted by Sideroxylon View Post
Do you believe that hate preaching can incite people to acts of terrorism?
It can, but it often doesn't meet the legal requirements to qualify as incitement.

Quote:
The suggestion that hate preachers who are foreign nationals might be denied visas suggests to me you believe some kind of risk exists. What are the certain circumstances? Why limit access to free speech to foreign nationals only?
Foreign nationals have no right to enter the US. Denying them entry does not deprive them of any rights. And the potential scope for governmental abuse of regulating foreign national entry versus regulating citizen speech is much, much smaller

Quote:
I think leaders should publicly and unambiguously speak out against hate speech.
Sure.

Quote:
However, it seems to me that where there is a vacuum in leadership and laws, protest actions like egging someone seems on the table.
I disagree.

Quote:
I believe that speech that denies the dignity of others should be not only be spoken out on but also legislated against.
Just about any criticism of anyone can be classified as denying them dignity. Authoritarian governments routinely use that excuse to imprison critics. I believe that your solution is potentially worse than the problem.

Quote:
It is unacceptable in a society in which all members have an equal right to dignity
There is no such thing as a right to dignity. It's meaningless.

Quote:
We just simply cannot have people who flaunt symbols of genocide while preaching white supremacy.
We've had that for decades. We seem to have survived.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th May 2019, 04:50 PM   #1662
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 85,000
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
We've had that for decades. We seem to have survived.
The US seems to have been, so far, pretty resilient to extremism. The big two of the 20th century, communism and fascism, didn't manage to take hold there while it essentially polarised the rest of the world.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th May 2019, 04:59 PM   #1663
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 38,250
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
The US seems to have been, so far, pretty resilient to extremism. The big two of the 20th century, communism and fascism, didn't manage to take hold there while it essentially polarised the rest of the world.
What's interesting is that the US got very extremist in its anti-communism, but did not descend into fascism to do so. When the reactionary fit passed, the institutions and system of government remained and continued on as they had all along.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th May 2019, 06:09 PM   #1664
mgidm86
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,709
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Yet in the USA other groups are made illegal for disseminating such ideas and that is fine, it seems only Nazis are to have this right to unfettered incitement to kill millions of their fellow citizens.

Originally Posted by Darat View Post
There's a page on the USA Gov site that lists some of them, not got it bookmarked at the moment I'll try and find it again and post it.

I too would like to see this list of illegal hate groups on the usa.gov site, or anywhere else on the web.

list of illegal hate groups in the usa

are hate groups illegal in the usa?

www.usa.gov: hate groups


Can't seem to find them.
__________________
Franklin understands certain kickbacks you obtain unfairly are legal liabilities; however, a risky deed's almost never detrimental despite extra external pressures.
mgidm86 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th May 2019, 07:17 PM   #1665
dann
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 8,745
So not a single hate group is illegal in the USA.
I'm not at all surprised.
__________________
/dann
"Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx
dann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th May 2019, 07:29 PM   #1666
dann
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 8,745
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
As usual, it depends on context. If made on air asking people to go out and do it, sure. If it's a comment made over dinner with friends, probably not. Hopefully the person in question will get nasty looks from said friends, and maybe even a slap upside the head.

So you do condone violence in some cases and even hope for it when people speak freely about something that you don't approve of. You just shouldn't egg them ...

Quote:
Roboramma made a small mistake, however. It wasn't my opinion that they should eat meat, in the analogy, but that they were silly (I wrote "willy" by mistake) to not do so.

Why are you deliberately changing the parameters of the analogy? No one said anything about forcing them. The point of the analogy is the relationship between opinion and incitement. Perhaps you should try to understand the analogy and how it applies, rather than knee-jerk attempt to hand-wave it away because you don't like where it leads.

No, of course you didn't say anything about forcing them. That's why it is a very poor analogy to Nazi speech. Nazis don't incite Jews to commit suicide. They incite others to exterminate the Jewish race, which was the whole idea of the Nazi Holocaust when they put it into practice.
__________________
/dann
"Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx
dann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th May 2019, 07:35 PM   #1667
dann
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 8,745
Originally Posted by Sideroxylon View Post
However, it seems to me that where there is a vacuum in leadership and laws, protest actions like egging someone seems on the table.

Egging also has a certain low-level impact when used against male chauvinists and war mongers, for instance. Alternatively flour bombs can be used. They proved to be very efficient against Bob Hope, for instance:

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
__________________
/dann
"Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx
dann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 01:52 AM   #1668
Roboramma
Penultimate Amazing
 
Roboramma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 12,901
Originally Posted by dann View Post
No, of course you didn't say anything about forcing them. That's why it is a very poor analogy to Nazi speech. Nazis don't incite Jews to commit suicide. They incite others to exterminate the Jewish race, which was the whole idea of the Nazi Holocaust when they put it into practice.
When they actually rise to the level of " incite others to exterminate the Jewish race" I'm all with you to using violence to stop them.

But again notice that the word "incite" has an actual legal definition.
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov
Roboramma is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 01:52 AM   #1669
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 13,354
Originally Posted by mgidm86 View Post
I too would like to see this list of illegal hate groups on the usa.gov site, or anywhere else on the web.

list of illegal hate groups in the usa

are hate groups illegal in the usa?

www.usa.gov: hate groups


Can't seem to find them.
You're looking for hate groups.

Here's what Darat was talking about. Sure, they all have violence and violent acts in common, but then again, shouldn't members have freedom of association if they themselves haven't done anything wrong? Not so, according to the US government.

Nazis have violence and violent acts in common with the listed groups. Nazis are also responsible for the majority of terrorist acts within the US for at least the last few years, possibly more.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 01:59 AM   #1670
Roboramma
Penultimate Amazing
 
Roboramma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 12,901
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
What's interesting is that the US got very extremist in its anti-communism, but did not descend into fascism to do so. When the reactionary fit passed, the institutions and system of government remained and continued on as they had all along.
I have a bunch of old episodes of Dan Carlin's Hardcore History podcast that I downloaded from his website a few years ago, and I was looking through them a couple of days ago and started listening to one that I didn't remember very well. It turns out it was about the "red scare"*.

The whole thing reminded me a lot of this thread, actually.

*The episode is titled "Radical Thoughts" for those who might be interested. I think I paid a dollar for it.
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov
Roboramma is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 02:31 AM   #1671
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 85,000
Originally Posted by dann View Post
So you do condone violence in some cases and even hope for it when people speak freely about something that you don't approve of.
If ever we needed an indisputable piece of evidence that you are NOT interested in actual discussion, but rather to play a game of gotcha, well, thank you for that. I think that should make clear to everyone reading this thread that you are simply not worth the effort.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 02:56 AM   #1672
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 13,354
Originally Posted by Roboramma View Post
I have a bunch of old episodes of Dan Carlin's Hardcore History podcast that I downloaded from his website a few years ago, and I was looking through them a couple of days ago and started listening to one that I didn't remember very well. It turns out it was about the "red scare"*.

The whole thing reminded me a lot of this thread, actually.

*The episode is titled "Radical Thoughts" for those who might be interested. I think I paid a dollar for it.
The difference, of course, is that US communists in the 1950s weren't going around advocating that certain racial groups be killed, and the paranoia was very much not based on anything that had actually happened, but what certain rabid right wingers imagined could happen, as opposed to Nazis being a clear and present danger to minorities all over the world currently.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 03:05 AM   #1673
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 47,866
Originally Posted by Roboramma View Post
When they actually rise to the level of " incite others to exterminate the Jewish race" I'm all with you to using violence to stop them.

But again notice that the word "incite" has an actual legal definition.
"
The speech is “directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action,” AND
The speech is “likely to incite or produce such action.”"

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/brandenburg_test

So of course imposing the death penalty or properly government orchestrated genocide are of course impossible to incite because they are nice and legal, so resisting such things with force is always immoral.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 05:21 AM   #1674
Myriad
Hyperthetical
 
Myriad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: A pocket paradise between the sewage treatment plant and the railroad
Posts: 15,443
I think throwing eggs at innocent schwarzen is going too far. We should not tolerate a schwarzen egger.
__________________
A zømbie once bit my sister...
Myriad is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 06:33 AM   #1675
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 38,250
Originally Posted by Myriad View Post
I think throwing eggs at innocent schwarzen is going too far. We should not tolerate a schwarzen egger.
I get the joke, but the phrase, "I think throwing eggs at innocent blacks is going too far" seems off. Like something a Southern Gentleman would say, right before saying, "some of the hardest workers on my plantation are blacks!"
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 09:07 AM   #1676
CaptainHowdy
Graduate Poster
 
CaptainHowdy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,291
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
No; someone advocating for the wholesale murder of you and all your relatives is not like "someone displaying an inverted cross and pentagrams" and claiming their religious views are more correct than yours. That's a laughably preposterous comparison.

The right of people not to be genocided is not some "cherished belief" that it's normal for different people to not accept; and someone calling for your murder is by definition an existential threat - how could it possibly not be?
Nobody is advocating for the wholesale murder of you and all your relatives. We're talking about people you call Nazis. People neither you nor anybody else has been able to distinguish from the Young Turks, the Zionists, the Tutsi and Hutus or anybody else who is part of a group that at one time used violence as a means to an end and/or practiced genocide. Is everybody out to kill you? If that's true, why can I egg them but I can't kill them?

Get a grip on yourself.

Sideroxylon, in this post, claimed that displaying symbols of genocide and preach white supremacy is an affront to the dignity of the Jews. I assume the 'symbol of genocide' is the swastika. Never mind that the swastika isn't a symbol of genocide and saying it is is an insult buddhists and hindus. If a swastika is an affront to the dignity of the Jews, then the inverted cross serves the same purpose to Christians. The resurrection is a fundamental belief in Christianity. Denying it's reality is an affront to Christians. Just like drawing a picture of Mohammed is an affront to the Islamic community. Christians are better able to handle criticism of their faith so they don't collapse into hysterics when they are criticized but that doesn't mean they do not feel insulted. We all know how mature Muslims act when somebody draws a picture of Mohammed.

But the point is, if we're going to legislate against people who insult the dignity of the Jews, we need to protect people of all faiths from exposure to ideas they don't like.
CaptainHowdy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 09:15 AM   #1677
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 38,250
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
You're looking for hate groups.

Here's what Darat was talking about.
I'm not so sure. Darat was talking about a list published by the US government on a US government website. Also, Darat was talking about groups that had been outlawed for disseminating ideas, but these lists are about groups that engage in illegal acts. Thanks for trying to help, but I'll wait for Darat's examples, since he probably knows best what he actually had in mind.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 10:01 AM   #1678
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 87,589
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I'm not so sure. Darat was talking about a list published by the US government on a US government website. Also, Darat was talking about groups that had been outlawed for disseminating ideas, but these lists are about groups that engage in illegal acts. Thanks for trying to help, but I'll wait for Darat's examples, since he probably knows best what he actually had in mind.
Oh and there I thought you were going to be honest.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 10:05 AM   #1679
applecorped
Rotten to the Core
 
applecorped's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 19,748
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Oh and there I thought you were going to be honest.
__________________
All You Need Is Love.
applecorped is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 10:15 AM   #1680
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 44,154
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Oh and there I thought you were going to be honest.
He was honest. And you STILL haven't given us a single name for any of these groups. A lot of people are waiting.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:12 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.