Ah no, I spent no time on the site at all. It simply wasn’t obvious to me what chimpout scanned as. Took me a good hour to see the “chimp” - my initial scan was as Chim Pout which made no sense.
You wanna give me a raise so I can afford to move to that higher socioeconomic neighborhood?
Meh from me to. It’s horrible and repugnant but really OP, did you just find out about the internet? Hate shit is everywhere. I wouldn’t have given them the press myself.
I know it’s sick to find humor in such irony (and I dutifully apologize) but they must hate that one of their main drums to beat is named Coon:
Finally, I am not at all ashamed of my entire race just because some of them are sick wastes of carbon. Your remark that you are reeks of racism itself.
This
You know this thread prolly doubled the traffic for chimpout.com
Yeah, if only some blacks weren’t so uppity, then white people wouldn’t have to hate them. :rolleyes:
While not a quarter as tasteless and vitriolic as chimpout dot com, here’s a message board that sends out a strong 1960s-style “Kill Whitey!” message.
www . assatashakur . org / forum
Feel the love. I only wish some of these folks would start posting on newspaper sites. Lawn chair, indeed.
The entire story behind the site, and the identities of everyone involved: Innnteresting!
Yeah, that’ll work. :rolleyes:
As kidneyfailure said, you are correct in pointing out there is a difference between nationalism and racism (not that such instruction was really called for in this thread because I think everyone knows that), but I think you are misguided in trying to equate Japanese and Korean animosity with French and German animosity.
I could be wrong, because I’m not well versed in current French-German relations, so I ask, is it mainstream practice for French companies to refuse to employ people who were born in France, whose parents were born in France, who speak only French, but whose grandparents were German?
If so, I’d call that racism, not nationalism, and the same thing happens in Japan for ‘Koreans’.
It’s a mildly interesting summary, though not without its flaws. I rather doubt chimpout is “the most racist website in North America”, for example. Rather, the various racist websites collectively form an amorphous blob from which no clear “winner” emerges - just an endless round of one-upmanship based on who can be the most “outrageous”.
I also dislike the self-censorship (i.e. constantly replacing “nigger” with “n****r”, as though someone reading an article about “the most racist website in North America” might be too delicate to handle the word written out) that takes an unfortunate turn to advocating general censorship, like “In England, such websites are taken down”, without clarifying if this is a governmental or private practice. The author goes on to encourage the reader to contact site hosts to get racist websites shut down (that the contributors to such posts are often anonymous seems particularly troubling to the author, for reasons that elude me, and seem especially ironic in light of the essay being signed: “Sincerely, Justice Against”), and that’s fine, I guess, though this side note baffles me a bit:
Is that supposed to be a challenge? It sounds vaguely to me like an expression of annoyance that chimpout is not vulnerable to private attempts to silence them, forcing the more boring and banal route of complaining to the server hosts.
Overall, the essay is in serious need of editing for flow and readability.
Yes, the original article was much more in-depth but my disk crashed and I had to hastily rewrite it from memory. There was much more. The effect was diminished.
I used **** wherever applicable, because doing otherwise tends to alienate some people.
(The site has been attacked endlessly. It has changed its IP address 400 times.)
But my point with the article is that it is not ‘free-speech’ and is really not something which could be considered protected by the 1st amendment.
It is anonymous public hate speech with no identifiable speaker. It also violates most of the 1st amendment exception outlined in the constitution:
(Defamation, fighting words, incitement to crime, sedition, obscenity, offense.)
But, particularly, it is exploitation of tragedy and the suffering of others that the constitution has not even any provision for, since no one has pushed the boundaries of cruelty to this extent.
Also, this is not a sign in someone’s yard. It is a permanent public display, displaying in search results, requiring no membership and actively spreading itself through public channels for profit. There is no option to avoid the site. You will run into it sooner or later.
So, perhaps we have reached the boundaries of what is allowed to be publicly said with no accountability whatsoever.
Sure it’s free speech, and it is clearly protected by the First Amendment.
I don’t think these mean what you think they do.
[ul][li]IANAL, but I believe defamation is only actionable if it is addressed to someone specific, and has some kind of provable damages. [/li][li]Likewise for “fighting words”. You will have a difficult time if you attack someone because someone else called you a nasty name.[/li][li]I didn’t see any incitement to crime or sedition. I grant you, I didn’t read very much of the site. [/li][li]It does not appear to my layman’s eye to meet the standard of obscenity. [/li][li]There is no exception to the First Amendment in cases of “offense”. That’s not how it works. [/ul][/li]
I managed to avoid it somehow, over the last few years.
Not as far as I can tell. Some people are stupid and racist, and put up websites where they can show the world that they are stupid and racist. So?
Regards.
Shodan
I felt the same way when I stumbled across stormfront. So much irrational hatred being open and encouraged is disgusting to see.
Sites like this will get people thinking that maybe they should make some changes to the first amendment, which is why it should be destroyed.
Like I said before. It’s not free-speech when nobody knows who said it. It’s just speech. 20 years ago, you had to go to a meeting in a physical location to find diseased minds masturbating their own self-hatred. Now they are invisible entrepreneurs in public view.
It doesn’t take a lot of imagination to see where an “endless round of one-upmanship based on who can be the most ‘outrageous’” is headed. Sites like these make the world more dangerous and shitty. They don’t permit this garbage in here in the U.K.
Just because you have enough sense to avoid it doesn’t mean everyone else does. There are probably 12 year olds using the site, thinking “Wow, n****ers must be really terrible.”
I can’t believe I have to even tell you this. Are you blind? Pissing on the president because he’s black? Mocking a dead Haiti earthquake child? Since when the fuck is this passable or acceptable or defensible in any fucking way
It’s nothing but an empty chasm of ruthless evil for the purpose of inflicting maximum psychological damage, moderated by a guy who is most likely going to be in prison for the rest of his life for murder.
Explain why when an Islamic guy makes a veiled threat to the South Park guys, the site is completely destroyed. But this site is still here?
I’ll tell you why. It’s too horrible to even deal with. So people just pretend that it doesn’t exist. And you guys are probably white, but imagine if you’re black. What the fuck do you think then? Have you thought about that?
I have no problem with a roast, I make fun of myself, everybody. But laughing and ridiculing a black mother picking up her dead baby? Get the fuck out of here. You forfeit your rights at that point.
You realize that racism is not the only offensive, disgusting, outrageous form of speech, right? Maybe it is to you, but there would probably be a lot of people highly offended and outraged at websites making fun of other peoples’ tragedies and misfortunes even without any racial element. Should these sites also be banned? Should shock sites be banned? Should rotten.com and 4chan be banned? Surely there are thousands, if not millions, across the country who would be exceptionally disgusted by the content on those sites. See where I’m going with this?
You’re basically staking the position that “racism is the worst thing ever; only racist speech should be banned.” That’s absurd and totally subjective. You’re living in a bubble.
:dubious:
You get those invisible people out of places where I can see them!
Uh, do you realize that at the heart of this comment is the same illogical stupidity that lies in the hearts and minds of the people who frequent the website you cited?
I agree. No individual is a representative of his race, religion, or nationality.
Epic start.
This is really low quality, shallow racism. I think the best I’ve ever read is still the Turner Diaries.