Neo-Nazi homeschoolers could get taxpayer funds under GOP-backed bill - Page 2

Lukraak_Sisser · 15th March 2023, 09:40 AM

Originally Posted by dudalb

I just don't share your boundless trust in governments doing the right thing.

Whereas I don't share your boundless trust that everyone is a decent person that can be trusted not to harm their neighbours.

Norman Alexander · 15th March 2023, 12:05 PM

Originally Posted by TragicMonkey

There's a sub-Reddit for survivors of homeschooling. It seems that the main problem is that nothing is being taught, past a certain point. The parents want the kids out of public schools but eventually (or immediately, in some cases) lose ability and interest to teach anything themselves, so the kids just stay home without getting taught anything at all. Then they hit adulthood and have to make up for the lapse. They start the economic race significantly underprepared.

So what did their parents do with all the home-schooling assistance money they were given? 420-blaze it?

dudalb · 17th March 2023, 12:41 PM

Originally Posted by Darat

Where do I demonstrate boundless trust in governments doing the right thing?

I just think outlawing any speech,however offesnive, is a horrible, horrible, precedent.

shemp · 17th March 2023, 02:59 PM

Originally Posted by dudalb

I just think outlawing any speech,however offesnive, is a horrible, horrible, precedent.

I shall go outside and scream racial slurs at my Indian neighbors, and tell them you said it was OK.

Stacyhs · 17th March 2023, 04:41 PM

Originally Posted by shemp

I shall go outside and scream racial slurs at my Indian neighbors, and tell them you said it was OK.

No problem. They probably don't speak English anyway!

Lukraak_Sisser · 17th March 2023, 11:06 PM

Originally Posted by dudalb

I just think outlawing any speech,however offesnive, is a horrible, horrible, precedent.

That type of thought allowed the fascists in Europe in the 1920's to 'just tell people what they thought' since after all 'it was just using free speech' and laid the groundwork for people to stay silent during the holocaust as they'd had 20 years of newspapers telling them Jews were untermensch.

IMO that set a worse precedent.

Norman Alexander · 17th March 2023, 11:11 PM

Is there some confusion between "allowing free speech" and "letting vile, repugnant hate-speech go completely unanswered and uncontested"?

bruto · 18th March 2023, 07:14 AM

The free speech issue seems a good reason to encourage public schooling and discourage home schooling by making it at least a less attractive option. We can't after all really control what people do or think or say most of the time, and it's obvious enough that we can't prevent the scummiest of scum from arising and spewing their scummy ideas. But we can at least try to insure that their kids find themselves in an environment that is at least a little bit diverse, a little bit less scummy, and not dedicated to the specific purpose of propagating scum, rather than passing legislation that makes it easier to raise them in a scummy cocoon and get paid for it. Of course it would help if fewer of our legislators were scum themselves.

Not that I have a problem with scum or anything. But I must say as I get older, I find myself drifting away from the old "I hope I live to see the day" into "at least I won't live to see the day."

Gulliver Foyle · 20th March 2023, 02:31 AM

Originally Posted by dudalb

I just think outlawing any speech,however offesnive, is a horrible, horrible, precedent.

Certain types of speech are illegal in Ireland, for instance Trump's speech on January 6th would have been grounds for charges under incitement to hatred laws, and Ireland is a better society than the US, partly as a result.

The Don · 20th March 2023, 02:40 AM

Originally Posted by Gulliver Foyle

Certain types of speech are illegal in Ireland, for instance Trump's speech on January 6th would have been grounds for charges under incitement to hatred laws, and Ireland is a better society than the US, partly as a result.

You may think that, I might agree but the US seems different in that free speech absolutism is very strong. In the case of "your right to x stops at my right to y", in the US your right to free speech carries much more weight than elsewhere.

People in the US look at European constraints on free speech with horror and think that we've given up too much for too little.

Gulliver Foyle · 20th March 2023, 03:30 AM

Originally Posted by The Don

You may think that, I might agree but the US seems different in that free speech absolutism is very strong. In the case of "your right to x stops at my right to y", in the US your right to free speech carries much more weight than elsewhere.

People in the US look at European constraints on free speech with horror and think that we've given up too much for too little.

We have proper free speechbin Europe, a large part because we've seen the horrors of not enforcing laws against criminal speech. The US is about to see what happens in a free speech absolutist society with the republicans busy recreating the NSDAP.

The Don · 20th March 2023, 04:18 AM

Originally Posted by Gulliver Foyle

We have proper free speechbin Europe, a large part because we've seen the horrors of not enforcing laws against criminal speech. The US is about to see what happens in a free speech absolutist society with the republicans busy recreating the NSDAP.

You say that like there isn't a significant minority of people (and likely a majority of Republicans) who wouldn't have a significant problem with this so long as their own lives and circumstances aren't inconvenienced too much.

Darat · 20th March 2023, 04:26 AM

Originally Posted by The Don

You may think that, I might agree but the US seems different in that free speech absolutism is very strong. In the case of "your right to x stops at my right to y", in the US your right to free speech carries much more weight than elsewhere.

People in the US look at European constraints on free speech with horror and think that we've given up too much for too little.

What most USA folk here argue about free speech is that someone should be allowed to promote criminal activities, for example the murdering of fellow citizens, the theft of private property and so on.

JoeMorgue · 20th March 2023, 05:04 AM

We're talking about Nazis so I assume it's now a topic about free speech.

Find yourself a woman who loves you as much as Nazi apologists love free speech.

Darat · 20th March 2023, 05:33 AM

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

We're talking about Nazis so I assume it's now a topic about free speech.

Find yourself a woman who loves you as much as Nazi apologists love free speech.

Don't you know society will collapse into authoritarian communism if people who want to murder millions of their fellow citizens aren't allowed to incite people to murder their fellow citizens in their millions?

Who'd want to live in a society where you can't incite for the murder of your fellow citizens?

Norman Alexander · 20th March 2023, 06:04 AM

Originally Posted by Darat

Don't you know society will collapse into authoritarian communism if people who want to murder millions of their fellow citizens aren't allowed to incite people to murder their fellow citizens in their millions?

Who'd want to live in a society where you can't incite for the murder of your fellow citizens?

And yet if you incite the murder of a select few fellow US citizens, you can end up under arrest and in jail VERY quickly, there to stay for a LONG time.

Myriad · 20th March 2023, 06:50 AM

Originally Posted by Norman Alexander

And yet if you incite the murder of a select few fellow US citizens, you can end up under arrest and in jail VERY quickly, there to stay for a LONG time.

There is an aspect of unequal treatment involved there, but it also has a lot to do with the specificity of a threat.

Except where a dress code forbids t-shirts regardless of content, I could wear a "Thanos Was Right" t-shirt anywhere, even in Disney World. Heck, I could probably buy one in Disney World.

Suddenly · 20th March 2023, 07:24 AM

Originally Posted by Norman Alexander

Is there some confusion between "allowing free speech" and "letting vile, repugnant hate-speech go completely unanswered and uncontested"?

Is blasphemy vile, repugnant hate speech? There are still laws against that on the books in a lot of US states. I don't think it is, but I'm not an easily offended cultural Christian who uses religion as a way to justify white supremacy.

Public ostracism is the only real defense against this sort of speech. Laws are a sort of sideshow to that.

The problem is that an awful lot of liberal minded people in the US forget that part requires more than shaking one's head sadly. If you are going to say that nazis have a right to advocate genocide, you need to be out there advocating shutting these people out of society and meeting their speech and physical threats of force with overwhelming rhetorical and physical shows of force. This is where free speech is not formal debate.

Nazis should be treated as harshly as those advocating for sex with children. If the proud boys were committing and threatening violence in the cause of pedophilia I'd imagine or at least hope that an antifa type response would be viewed differently. I'd hope there would be way less people willing to at humor "both sides" arguments

Norman Alexander · 20th March 2023, 05:35 PM

Originally Posted by Suddenly

Is blasphemy vile, repugnant hate speech? There are still laws against that on the books in a lot of US states. I don't think it is, but I'm not an easily offended cultural Christian who uses religion as a way to justify white supremacy.

As opposed to the fascist right who do. Cynically so, in fact.

Quote:

Public ostracism is the only real defense against this sort of speech. Laws are a sort of sideshow to that.

Uh, no. Hate speech is, in fact, illegal in many countries. No sideshow about it.

Quote:

The problem is that an awful lot of liberal minded people in the US forget that part requires more than shaking one's head sadly. If you are going to say that nazis have a right to advocate genocide, you need to be out there advocating shutting these people out of society and meeting their speech and physical threats of force with overwhelming rhetorical and physical shows of force. This is where free speech is not formal debate.

...have you not been watching the news??

Quote:

Nazis should be treated as harshly as those advocating for sex with children. If the proud boys were committing and threatening violence in the cause of pedophilia I'd imagine or at least hope that an antifa type response would be viewed differently. I'd hope there would be way less people willing to at humor "both sides" arguments

Not ANTIFA, but normal, sensible, MOR type response. Plenty of caring conservatives went to actual war and died fighting to bring down Nazi/proudboy values and regime. They were the "original" anti-fascists.

Suddenly · 21st March 2023, 06:55 AM

Originally Posted by Norman Alexander

Uh, no. Hate speech is, in fact, illegal in many countries. No sideshow about it.

It is a sideshow. If a critical mass of people have and express beliefs consistent with illegal hate speech those laws are worthless. They can be helpful in maybe avoiding reaching that critical mass, but that's about it. In the culture of the US they'd likely do more harm than good.

Quote:

Plenty of caring conservatives went to actual war and died fighting to bring down Nazi/proudboy values and regime. They were the "original" anti-fascists.

By shooting nazis. Which seems a bit much at this juncture. Sticking with the showing up at fascist rallies to physically protect counterprotesters and maybe punch someone in the face here or there strikes me as more proportionate, but maybe I'm soft.

Norman Alexander · 21st March 2023, 04:06 PM

Originally Posted by Suddenly

It is a sideshow. If a critical mass of people have and express beliefs consistent with illegal hate speech those laws are worthless. They can be helpful in maybe avoiding reaching that critical mass, but that's about it. In the culture of the US they'd likely do more harm than good.

They are worthless if not enforced.

Quote:

By shooting nazis. Which seems a bit much at this juncture. Sticking with the showing up at fascist rallies to physically protect counterprotesters and maybe punch someone in the face here or there strikes me as more proportionate, but maybe I'm soft.

Not really. America is a gun-crazed and gun-soaked country. 60,000 citizens die by the gun every year and that seems to be perfectly acceptable (well...nobody seems to want to do anything about it). A couple of dozen more each year should be just fine. So if these extras are a bunch of Nazis, that should be A-OK, I imagine.

Suddenly · 22nd March 2023, 12:20 PM

Originally Posted by Norman Alexander

They are worthless if not enforced.

They won't be enforceable at that point. If you find yourself in a country full of fascists calling the cops isn't going to stop it.

Norman Alexander · 22nd March 2023, 01:06 PM

Originally Posted by Suddenly

They won't be enforceable at that point. If you find yourself in a country full of fascists calling the cops isn't going to stop it.

Well, there's your problem right there.

Gulliver Foyle · 23rd March 2023, 03:11 AM

Originally Posted by The Don

You say that like there isn't a significant minority of people (and likely a majority of Republicans) who wouldn't have a significant problem with this so long as their own lives and circumstances aren't inconvenienced too much.

They won't have a problem right up until the Party comes to take them away. "When they come for me, who will be left to speak out?" is what they should be thinking.

bruto · 23rd March 2023, 07:37 AM

Originally Posted by Gulliver Foyle

They won't have a problem right up until the Party comes to take them away. "When they come for me, who will be left to speak out?" is what they should be thinking.

Thinking is the bottleneck here. People who wrap oppression in the flag of liberty could wear that statement on a T-shirt and still find out too late what it means.

dudalb · 23rd March 2023, 03:20 PM

The main problem with outlawing hate speech is who decides what is hate speech?
A Right US Government could decide that any attack on relgion is "Hate Speech",
Yes, free speech absoultisim is strong in the US, and, as one Brit who posts here pointed out, we do feel in Europe as far as free speech goes, they have given up too much for too little.
And, as always, it is the old question of Who Will Watch The Watchers?

dudalb · 23rd March 2023, 03:23 PM

Originally Posted by Darat

What most USA folk here argue about free speech is that someone should be allowed to promote criminal activities, for example the murdering of fellow citizens, the theft of private property and so on.

It's a question of specificity. Under US law, you have to show that speech actually inspried a specific criminal action to be prosecutable.

dudalb · 23rd March 2023, 03:26 PM

Originally Posted by Gulliver Foyle

They won't have a problem right up until the Party comes to take them away. "When they come for me, who will be left to speak out?" is what they should be thinking.

And who decides what is hate speech and what is not?
I could easily make a case that Marxist parties should be banned given the history of Marxist regimes in other coutnries, that Marxism is a dangerous philisophy that should be banned.
The left can be just a power hungry as the right.

Stacyhs · 23rd March 2023, 05:47 PM

Originally Posted by dudalb

And who decides what is hate speech and what is not?
I could easily make a case that Marxist parties should be banned given the history of Marxist regimes in other coutnries, that Marxism is a dangerous philisophy that should be banned.
The left can be just a power hungry as the right.

Extremes are closer to each other than we like to admit. Horseshoe.

dudalb · 23rd March 2023, 06:02 PM

And whenever they come to take away your individual liberty, they always have wondeful sounding reasons. And "defending Freedom" is as wonderful sounding as it gets.
Still, I am really having problems with the idea that surpressing freedom of speech..no matter how offensive is somehow "defending freedom".

Pixel42 · 23rd March 2023, 08:31 PM

Originally Posted by dudalb

It's a question of specificity. Under US law, you have to show that speech actually inspried a specific criminal action to be prosecutable.

And yet Trump is still repeating the same speech two years later.

Stacyhs · 24th March 2023, 06:38 PM

Originally Posted by Pixel42

And yet Trump is still repeating the same speech two years later.

Some people never learn even while under investigation likely being charged with that crime.

Gulliver Foyle · 25th March 2023, 12:44 AM

Originally Posted by dudalb

The main problem with outlawing hate speech is who decides what is hate speech?
A Right US Government could decide that any attack on relgion is "Hate Speech",
Yes, free speech absoultisim is strong in the US, and, as one Brit who posts here pointed out, we do feel in Europe as far as free speech goes, they have given up too much for too little.
And, as always, it is the old question of Who Will Watch The Watchers?

What have we given up in Europe, pray tell?

Parsman · 25th March 2023, 04:08 AM

Originally Posted by Gulliver Foyle

What have we given up in Europe, pray tell?

This. Believing that the USA is some bastion of free speech which makes us in Europe ashamed is just another example of American exceptionalism. Being pretty much able to say anything you like without any sanction though seems to lead to idiocracy rather than democracy, a trend which is amplified in our technological age.

The Don · 25th March 2023, 11:48 PM

Originally Posted by Gulliver Foyle

What have we given up in Europe, pray tell?

We're a cowed bunch who can only do and say whet our authoritarian governments allow us to - which is why France is so quiet right now despite the pension age being raised.

15th March 2023, 12:05 PM	#42
Norman Alexander Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: Dharug & Gundungurra Posts: 14,227	Originally Posted by TragicMonkey There's a sub-Reddit for survivors of homeschooling. It seems that the main problem is that nothing is being taught, past a certain point. The parents want the kids out of public schools but eventually (or immediately, in some cases) lose ability and interest to teach anything themselves, so the kids just stay home without getting taught anything at all. Then they hit adulthood and have to make up for the lapse. They start the economic race significantly underprepared. So what did their parents do with all the home-schooling assistance money they were given? 420-blaze it?
	__________________ _{...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornets’ nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015}

17th March 2023, 12:41 PM	#43
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Sacramento Posts: 57,771	Originally Posted by Darat Where do I demonstrate boundless trust in governments doing the right thing? I just think outlawing any speech,however offesnive, is a horrible, horrible, precedent.
	__________________ Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty. Robert Heinlein.

17th March 2023, 02:59 PM	#44
shemp a flimsy character...perfidious and despised Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Out back preparing the bunker for the next Civil War Posts: 53,808	Originally Posted by dudalb I just think outlawing any speech,however offesnive, is a horrible, horrible, precedent. I shall go outside and scream racial slurs at my Indian neighbors, and tell them you said it was OK.
	__________________ "Yes, I'll be around for many more centuries. You, meanwhile, will have long ago been turned into value dog food, despite your express wishes to the contrary." -- JihadJane

17th March 2023, 11:11 PM	#47
Norman Alexander Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: Dharug & Gundungurra Posts: 14,227	Is there some confusion between "allowing free speech" and "letting vile, repugnant hate-speech go completely unanswered and uncontested"?
	__________________ _{...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornets’ nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015}

18th March 2023, 07:14 AM	#48
bruto Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy Posts: 34,262	The free speech issue seems a good reason to encourage public schooling and discourage home schooling by making it at least a less attractive option. We can't after all really control what people do or think or say most of the time, and it's obvious enough that we can't prevent the scummiest of scum from arising and spewing their scummy ideas. But we can at least try to insure that their kids find themselves in an environment that is at least a little bit diverse, a little bit less scummy, and not dedicated to the specific purpose of propagating scum, rather than passing legislation that makes it easier to raise them in a scummy cocoon and get paid for it. Of course it would help if fewer of our legislators were scum themselves. Not that I have a problem with scum or anything. But I must say as I get older, I find myself drifting away from the old "I hope I live to see the day" into "at least I won't live to see the day."
	__________________ Like many humorless and indignant people, he is hard on everybody but himself, and does not perceive it when he fails his own ideal (Molière) A pedant is a man who studies a vacuum through instruments that allow him to draw cross-sections of the details (John Ciardi)

15th March 2023, 09:40 AM	#41
Lukraak_Sisser Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 4,883	Originally Posted by dudalb I just don't share your boundless trust in governments doing the right thing. Whereas I don't share your boundless trust that everyone is a decent person that can be trusted not to harm their neighbours.

17th March 2023, 04:41 PM	#45
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 29,387	Originally Posted by shemp I shall go outside and scream racial slurs at my Indian neighbors, and tell them you said it was OK. No problem. They probably don't speak English anyway!

17th March 2023, 11:06 PM	#46
Lukraak_Sisser Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 4,883	Originally Posted by dudalb I just think outlawing any speech,however offesnive, is a horrible, horrible, precedent. That type of thought allowed the fascists in Europe in the 1920's to 'just tell people what they thought' since after all 'it was just using free speech' and laid the groundwork for people to stay silent during the holocaust as they'd had 20 years of newspapers telling them Jews were untermensch. IMO that set a worse precedent.

20th March 2023, 02:31 AM	#49
Gulliver Foyle Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2014 Location: Cork baaaiii Posts: 1,296	Originally Posted by dudalb I just think outlawing any speech,however offesnive, is a horrible, horrible, precedent. Certain types of speech are illegal in Ireland, for instance Trump's speech on January 6th would have been grounds for charges under incitement to hatred laws, and Ireland is a better society than the US, partly as a result.

20th March 2023, 02:40 AM	#50
The Don Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Sir Fynwy Posts: 36,371	Originally Posted by Gulliver Foyle Certain types of speech are illegal in Ireland, for instance Trump's speech on January 6th would have been grounds for charges under incitement to hatred laws, and Ireland is a better society than the US, partly as a result. You may think that, I might agree but the US seems different in that free speech absolutism is very strong. In the case of "your right to x stops at my right to y", in the US your right to free speech carries much more weight than elsewhere. People in the US look at European constraints on free speech with horror and think that we've given up too much for too little.

20th March 2023, 03:30 AM	#51
Gulliver Foyle Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2014 Location: Cork baaaiii Posts: 1,296	Originally Posted by The Don You may think that, I might agree but the US seems different in that free speech absolutism is very strong. In the case of "your right to x stops at my right to y", in the US your right to free speech carries much more weight than elsewhere. People in the US look at European constraints on free speech with horror and think that we've given up too much for too little. We have proper free speechbin Europe, a large part because we've seen the horrors of not enforcing laws against criminal speech. The US is about to see what happens in a free speech absolutist society with the republicans busy recreating the NSDAP.

20th March 2023, 04:18 AM	#52
The Don Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Sir Fynwy Posts: 36,371	Originally Posted by Gulliver Foyle We have proper free speechbin Europe, a large part because we've seen the horrors of not enforcing laws against criminal speech. The US is about to see what happens in a free speech absolutist society with the republicans busy recreating the NSDAP. You say that like there isn't a significant minority of people (and likely a majority of Republicans) who wouldn't have a significant problem with this so long as their own lives and circumstances aren't inconvenienced too much.

20th March 2023, 04:26 AM	#53
Darat Lackey Administrator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: South East, UK Posts: 108,117	Originally Posted by The Don You may think that, I might agree but the US seems different in that free speech absolutism is very strong. In the case of "your right to x stops at my right to y", in the US your right to free speech carries much more weight than elsewhere. People in the US look at European constraints on free speech with horror and think that we've given up too much for too little. What most USA folk here argue about free speech is that someone should be allowed to promote criminal activities, for example the murdering of fellow citizens, the theft of private property and so on.
	__________________ I wish I knew how to quit you

20th March 2023, 05:04 AM	#54
JoeMorgue Self Employed Remittance Man Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 43,036	We're talking about Nazis so I assume it's now a topic about free speech. Find yourself a woman who loves you as much as Nazi apologists love free speech.
	__________________ "If everyone in the room says water is wet and I say it's dry that makes me smart because at least I'm thinking for myself!" - The Proudly Wrong.

20th March 2023, 05:33 AM	#55
Darat Lackey Administrator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: South East, UK Posts: 108,117	Originally Posted by JoeMorgue We're talking about Nazis so I assume it's now a topic about free speech. Find yourself a woman who loves you as much as Nazi apologists love free speech. Don't you know society will collapse into authoritarian communism if people who want to murder millions of their fellow citizens aren't allowed to incite people to murder their fellow citizens in their millions? Who'd want to live in a society where you can't incite for the murder of your fellow citizens?
	__________________ I wish I knew how to quit you

20th March 2023, 06:04 AM	#56
Norman Alexander Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: Dharug & Gundungurra Posts: 14,227	Originally Posted by Darat Don't you know society will collapse into authoritarian communism if people who want to murder millions of their fellow citizens aren't allowed to incite people to murder their fellow citizens in their millions? Who'd want to live in a society where you can't incite for the murder of your fellow citizens? And yet if you incite the murder of a select few fellow US citizens, you can end up under arrest and in jail VERY quickly, there to stay for a LONG time.
	__________________ _{...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornets’ nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015}

20th March 2023, 06:50 AM	#57
Myriad The Clarity Is Devastating Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Betwixt Posts: 19,988	Originally Posted by Norman Alexander And yet if you incite the murder of a select few fellow US citizens, you can end up under arrest and in jail VERY quickly, there to stay for a LONG time. There is an aspect of unequal treatment involved there, but it also has a lot to do with the specificity of a threat. Except where a dress code forbids t-shirts regardless of content, I could wear a "Thanos Was Right" t-shirt anywhere, even in Disney World. Heck, I could probably buy one in Disney World.
	__________________ A zømbie once bit my sister...

20th March 2023, 07:24 AM	#58
Suddenly No Punting Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Not In Follansbee Posts: 5,457	Originally Posted by Norman Alexander Is there some confusion between "allowing free speech" and "letting vile, repugnant hate-speech go completely unanswered and uncontested"? Is blasphemy vile, repugnant hate speech? There are still laws against that on the books in a lot of US states. I don't think it is, but I'm not an easily offended cultural Christian who uses religion as a way to justify white supremacy. Public ostracism is the only real defense against this sort of speech. Laws are a sort of sideshow to that. The problem is that an awful lot of liberal minded people in the US forget that part requires more than shaking one's head sadly. If you are going to say that nazis have a right to advocate genocide, you need to be out there advocating shutting these people out of society and meeting their speech and physical threats of force with overwhelming rhetorical and physical shows of force. This is where free speech is not formal debate. Nazis should be treated as harshly as those advocating for sex with children. If the proud boys were committing and threatening violence in the cause of pedophilia I'd imagine or at least hope that an antifa type response would be viewed differently. I'd hope there would be way less people willing to at humor "both sides" arguments
	Last edited by Suddenly; 20th March 2023 at 07:26 AM.

20th March 2023, 05:35 PM	#59
Norman Alexander Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: Dharug & Gundungurra Posts: 14,227	Originally Posted by Suddenly Is blasphemy vile, repugnant hate speech? There are still laws against that on the books in a lot of US states. I don't think it is, but I'm not an easily offended cultural Christian who uses religion as a way to justify white supremacy. As opposed to the fascist right who do. Cynically so, in fact. Quote: Public ostracism is the only real defense against this sort of speech. Laws are a sort of sideshow to that. Uh, no. Hate speech is, in fact, illegal in many countries. No sideshow about it. Quote: The problem is that an awful lot of liberal minded people in the US forget that part requires more than shaking one's head sadly. If you are going to say that nazis have a right to advocate genocide, you need to be out there advocating shutting these people out of society and meeting their speech and physical threats of force with overwhelming rhetorical and physical shows of force. This is where free speech is not formal debate. ...have you not been watching the news?? Quote: Nazis should be treated as harshly as those advocating for sex with children. If the proud boys were committing and threatening violence in the cause of pedophilia I'd imagine or at least hope that an antifa type response would be viewed differently. I'd hope there would be way less people willing to at humor "both sides" arguments Not ANTIFA, but normal, sensible, MOR type response. Plenty of caring conservatives went to actual war and died fighting to bring down Nazi/proudboy values and regime. They were the "original" anti-fascists.
	__________________ _{...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornets’ nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015}

21st March 2023, 06:55 AM	#60
Suddenly No Punting Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Not In Follansbee Posts: 5,457	Originally Posted by Norman Alexander Uh, no. Hate speech is, in fact, illegal in many countries. No sideshow about it. It is a sideshow. If a critical mass of people have and express beliefs consistent with illegal hate speech those laws are worthless. They can be helpful in maybe avoiding reaching that critical mass, but that's about it. In the culture of the US they'd likely do more harm than good. Quote: Plenty of caring conservatives went to actual war and died fighting to bring down Nazi/proudboy values and regime. They were the "original" anti-fascists. By shooting nazis. Which seems a bit much at this juncture. Sticking with the showing up at fascist rallies to physically protect counterprotesters and maybe punch someone in the face here or there strikes me as more proportionate, but maybe I'm soft.

21st March 2023, 04:06 PM	#61
Norman Alexander Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: Dharug & Gundungurra Posts: 14,227	Originally Posted by Suddenly It is a sideshow. If a critical mass of people have and express beliefs consistent with illegal hate speech those laws are worthless. They can be helpful in maybe avoiding reaching that critical mass, but that's about it. In the culture of the US they'd likely do more harm than good. They are worthless if not enforced. Quote: By shooting nazis. Which seems a bit much at this juncture. Sticking with the showing up at fascist rallies to physically protect counterprotesters and maybe punch someone in the face here or there strikes me as more proportionate, but maybe I'm soft. Not really. America is a gun-crazed and gun-soaked country. 60,000 citizens die by the gun every year and that seems to be perfectly acceptable (well...nobody seems to want to do anything about it). A couple of dozen more each year should be just fine. So if these extras are a bunch of Nazis, that should be A-OK, I imagine.
	__________________ _{...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornets’ nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015}

22nd March 2023, 12:20 PM	#62
Suddenly No Punting Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Not In Follansbee Posts: 5,457	Originally Posted by Norman Alexander They are worthless if not enforced. They won't be enforceable at that point. If you find yourself in a country full of fascists calling the cops isn't going to stop it.

22nd March 2023, 01:06 PM	#63
Norman Alexander Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: Dharug & Gundungurra Posts: 14,227	Originally Posted by Suddenly They won't be enforceable at that point. If you find yourself in a country full of fascists calling the cops isn't going to stop it. Well, there's your problem right there.
	__________________ _{...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornets’ nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015}

23rd March 2023, 03:11 AM	#64
Gulliver Foyle Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2014 Location: Cork baaaiii Posts: 1,296	Originally Posted by The Don You say that like there isn't a significant minority of people (and likely a majority of Republicans) who wouldn't have a significant problem with this so long as their own lives and circumstances aren't inconvenienced too much. They won't have a problem right up until the Party comes to take them away. "When they come for me, who will be left to speak out?" is what they should be thinking.

23rd March 2023, 07:37 AM	#65
bruto Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy Posts: 34,262	Originally Posted by Gulliver Foyle They won't have a problem right up until the Party comes to take them away. "When they come for me, who will be left to speak out?" is what they should be thinking. Thinking is the bottleneck here. People who wrap oppression in the flag of liberty could wear that statement on a T-shirt and still find out too late what it means.
	__________________ Like many humorless and indignant people, he is hard on everybody but himself, and does not perceive it when he fails his own ideal (Molière) A pedant is a man who studies a vacuum through instruments that allow him to draw cross-sections of the details (John Ciardi)

23rd March 2023, 03:20 PM	#66
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Sacramento Posts: 57,771	The main problem with outlawing hate speech is who decides what is hate speech? A Right US Government could decide that any attack on relgion is "Hate Speech", Yes, free speech absoultisim is strong in the US, and, as one Brit who posts here pointed out, we do feel in Europe as far as free speech goes, they have given up too much for too little. And, as always, it is the old question of Who Will Watch The Watchers?
	__________________ Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty. Robert Heinlein.

23rd March 2023, 03:23 PM	#67
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Sacramento Posts: 57,771	Originally Posted by Darat What most USA folk here argue about free speech is that someone should be allowed to promote criminal activities, for example the murdering of fellow citizens, the theft of private property and so on. It's a question of specificity. Under US law, you have to show that speech actually inspried a specific criminal action to be prosecutable.
	__________________ Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty. Robert Heinlein.

23rd March 2023, 03:26 PM	#68
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Sacramento Posts: 57,771	Originally Posted by Gulliver Foyle They won't have a problem right up until the Party comes to take them away. "When they come for me, who will be left to speak out?" is what they should be thinking. And who decides what is hate speech and what is not? I could easily make a case that Marxist parties should be banned given the history of Marxist regimes in other coutnries, that Marxism is a dangerous philisophy that should be banned. The left can be just a power hungry as the right.
	__________________ Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty. Robert Heinlein.

23rd March 2023, 05:47 PM	#69
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 29,387	Originally Posted by dudalb And who decides what is hate speech and what is not? I could easily make a case that Marxist parties should be banned given the history of Marxist regimes in other coutnries, that Marxism is a dangerous philisophy that should be banned. The left can be just a power hungry as the right. Extremes are closer to each other than we like to admit. Horseshoe.

23rd March 2023, 06:02 PM	#70
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Sacramento Posts: 57,771	And whenever they come to take away your individual liberty, they always have wondeful sounding reasons. And "defending Freedom" is as wonderful sounding as it gets. Still, I am really having problems with the idea that surpressing freedom of speech..no matter how offensive is somehow "defending freedom".
	__________________ Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty. Robert Heinlein.

23rd March 2023, 08:31 PM	#71
Pixel42 Schrödinger's cat Join Date: May 2004 Location: Malmesbury, UK Posts: 15,311	Originally Posted by dudalb It's a question of specificity. Under US law, you have to show that speech actually inspried a specific criminal action to be prosecutable. And yet Trump is still repeating the same speech two years later.
	__________________ "If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett Last edited by Pixel42; 23rd March 2023 at 10:03 PM.

24th March 2023, 06:38 PM	#72
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 29,387	Originally Posted by Pixel42 And yet Trump is still repeating the same speech two years later. Some people never learn even while under investigation likely being charged with that crime.

25th March 2023, 12:44 AM	#73
Gulliver Foyle Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2014 Location: Cork baaaiii Posts: 1,296	Originally Posted by dudalb The main problem with outlawing hate speech is who decides what is hate speech? A Right US Government could decide that any attack on relgion is "Hate Speech", Yes, free speech absoultisim is strong in the US, and, as one Brit who posts here pointed out, we do feel in Europe as far as free speech goes, they have given up too much for too little. And, as always, it is the old question of Who Will Watch The Watchers? What have we given up in Europe, pray tell?

25th March 2023, 04:08 AM	#74
Parsman Muse Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Bonnie Scotland Posts: 916	Originally Posted by Gulliver Foyle What have we given up in Europe, pray tell? This. Believing that the USA is some bastion of free speech which makes us in Europe ashamed is just another example of American exceptionalism. Being pretty much able to say anything you like without any sanction though seems to lead to idiocracy rather than democracy, a trend which is amplified in our technological age.
	__________________ I was not; I have been; I am not; I am content - Epicurus When you're dead you don't know that you're dead, all the pain is felt by others....................the same thing happens when you're stupid.

25th March 2023, 11:48 PM	#75
The Don Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Sir Fynwy Posts: 36,371	Originally Posted by Gulliver Foyle What have we given up in Europe, pray tell? We're a cowed bunch who can only do and say whet our authoritarian governments allow us to - which is why France is so quiet right now despite the pension age being raised.