Racial Tension in the U.S.

[The Oi]

You guys broke another toy.

 

[Tornicade]

Nazi Groups should be countered wherever they show up and they should be exposed whenever possible. however they are still free to voice their opinions . is the appropriate response Violence? no the appropriate response is to identify them . let them know who they are and make sure they don't gain any political power within the government

Should Nazie be publicly scorned nd shamed? absolutely. should guys go up to them with bats and fire shots out of an aerosol can.... not if they are being peaceful .
Inciteful hate speech should be addressed whenever it occurs regardless of who is doing the speaking.

 

[Nicky]

It's sad how many times you had to clarify your against Nazi's in fear of being labeled a sympathizer here

That's what you got out of that post?

I feel like my argument is not being taken as intended... Ahh well, carry on.

It would seem that people will focus on a small portion and make a mountain out of it. I understood what you meant.

 

[The Oi]

I have encountered Nazis in my every day life. I have done the same thing I have done when I have walked by lunatics raving in the streets...continued walking. I have too much going on to bother with these losers and weirdos.

Why can't you people do the same?

 

[David.]

Does free speech apply to people who wish to commit bodily harm, as Nazis and white supremacists do?

Depends on what they say. Call to action is illegal. Otherwise we're reading minds. Actually committing violence is illegal too.

I hate a lot of my exes but I wouldn't kill them.

Yvette felarca knew what she was doing and implied encouragement of violence against trump supporters on live TV and she was protected legally, as disgusting as I thought it was.

Were serious about defending free speech. I don't think you guys think that. It applies across the board. Its an important amendment for a reason and we don't just defend it when its easy.

 

[Huber.]

That's what you got out of that post?




It would seem that people will focus on a small portion and make a mountain out of it. I understood what you meant.

I'm not sure if you have been reading this today but he was just reiterating what others have said all day. That no matter how stupid and disgusting Nazi ideas are they have the right of free speech. Only now, he had to clarify he is anti-Nazi thanks to the last couple of pages. Nobody here is pro-Nazi and should be assumed so during discussions.

 

[Tlyons]

So everyone condemns antifa for the violence. What's the problem with acknowledging just how much worse "White Power" is?

The funny thing is Trump supported and encouraged violence at his campaign rallies.

 

[Jordan]

I'm not sure if you have been reading this today but he was just reiterating what others have said all day. That no matter how stupid and disgusting Nazi ideas are they have the right of free speech. Only now, he had to clarify he is anti-Nazi thanks to the last couple of pages. Nobody here is pro-Nazi and should be assumed so during discussions.

Ugh, that's not why I wrote the post how I did. Frankly, I glaze over the political threads and only carefully read a few select posters. My point is that it pains me to want to defend Nazi free speech. Literally to the point where I am disgusted. But I view the negatives with giving an American political leader(s) the power to control who can speak as even more dangerous than Nazi speech.

 

[David.]

Ugh, that's not why I wrote the post how I did. Frankly, I glaze over the political threads and only carefully read a few select posters. My point is that it pains me to want to defend Nazi free speech. Literally to the point where I am disgusted. But I view the negatives with giving an American political leader(s) the power to control who can speak as even more dangerous than Nazi speech.

He understands your pont. His point isn't an attempt to refutr anything you wrote. His point is that people are ironically calling people Nazis for supporting the first ammendment. Its been happening all week. So much that you have to now question the motives of the people making accusations.

 

[Jordan]

He understands your pont. His point isn't an attempt to refutr anything you wrote.

But he is speaking for me, and he is wrong, which is irritating. The reason I wrote the argument how I did had nothing to do with this thread. I couldn't give two shits how strangers on the internet view me.

 

[The Oi]

But he is speaking for me, and he is wrong, which is irritating. The reason I wrote the argument how I did had nothing to do with this thread. I couldn't give two shits how strangers on the internet view me.

Give a shit how I view you. It matters to me that it matters to you.

 

[David.]

But he is speaking for me, and he is wrong, which is irritating. The reason I wrote the argument how I did had nothing to do with this thread. I couldn't give two shits how strangers on the internet view me.

King, as someone thats been following the thread closely, his point isn't to assign motive to you. He's pointing out what youve said has gotten everyone else here called Nazi sympathizers.

 

[Tornicade]

But he is speaking for me, and he is wrong, which is irritating. The reason I wrote the argument how I did had nothing to do with this thread. I couldn't give two shits how strangers on the internet view me.

you should. irregular bowel movement is a sign of bad health

 

[czvo]

So maybe I can bring my own view to this? Try and get this back on subject.

I fucking hate Neo-Nazis, White Supremacists, etc. Frankly, like Gour, if I saw one actively protesting, I'd probably punch him.

Still, I think their speech should be defended as long as it does not incite violence for one main reason: who is deciding what speech should/not be defended? Do we want that power in the hands of someone like Trump? If you're a conservative, would you want that power in the hands of Clinton?

It's a power relations question to me. While I see no issue with Neo-Nazis losing their jobs, getting beat up, etc. Their right to protest freely and not violently should be defended, even if that means I end up breaking the law via assault, solely because I think deciding certain groups should lose freedom of speech is incredibly dangerous.

Again, I fucking hate Neo-Nazis. I don't think any of them are good people. I think Trump's speech was mortifying. They are not good people. Not even a little bit. But, I still don't know how we create a policy that limits their speech while also avoiding an eventual very slippery-slope. I, for one, do not want to give Trump anywhere close to that power.

Basically the same opinion I have, though I think Nazis deserve far worse than just losing their jobs.

The only counterpoint I'd bring up about the slippery slope: Germany banned Nazi symbolism, and they haven't descended into some black hole of free speech.

 

[godfather]

Nobody is defending them jack, not a single person here. We just don't want wide spread violence that is seemingly justified by only morality. Them being Nazis doesn't strip them of rights everybody has as an American like it or not. This country is as great as it is because nothing can be silenced. Not good ideas, not bad ideas, not horrible ideas.

I agree.

But if one of these fuck heads for example made a racial remark to my girlfriend, who is Muslim. I'm decking them though.