# Stupid Social Justice Warrior Bullshit O' the Day. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [March 17, 2017, 10:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443 "2017-03-17T22:14:21Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 37
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2017, 8:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443/721 "2017-04-18T20:15:59Z")
> [@Crazy\_Canuck](#): > > Protests do include many people speaking freely. However, I don’t consider protesting the exact same as practicing free speech. You and the first amendment would not get along very well. > [@](#): > > I can’t put my finger exactly on why, so I’ll have to think on that one a bit more. My gut says that it has to do with being about the individual vs. the group, but again, I’ll need to ponder this point more. So, your gut tells you that if a group of people have a grievance, they need to shut up about it, but if an individual wants to force you to provide him with a platform to spew his hate speech, you need to give it to him? > [@](#): > > It is true the most people only use censorship to discuss governments restricting people’s speech. That would be because that’s the definition. > [@](#): > > However, if you gather a group of people together for the purpose of ensuring that someone does not get a chance to speak, the word censorship seems very appropriate. This is regardless of whether you use violence or peaceful means to accomplish your goals. So, you would want to censure free speech, if it is in the form of protest against an individual that you want to hear? > [@](#): > > I’d go further into this, but I just had a rather large pile of invoicing get dumped on my desk and sadly I’m going to actually have to work for my paycheck today. I’ll try and come back later, time permitting. Good luck, I know what it’s like o have much on your plate. ---
**Author:** ![Airbeck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/airbeck/32/6574_2.png) [@Airbeck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airbeck)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2017, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443/722 "2017-04-18T20:19:42Z")
> [@Crazy\_Canuck](#): > > Protests do include many people speaking freely. However, I don’t consider protesting the exact same as practicing free speech. I can’t put my finger exactly on why, so I’ll have to think on that one a bit more. My gut says that it has to do with being about the individual vs. the group, but again, I’ll need to ponder this point more. > > It is true the most people only use censorship to discuss governments restricting people’s speech. However, if you gather a group of people together for the purpose of ensuring that someone does not get a chance to speak, the word censorship seems very appropriate. This is regardless of whether you use violence or peaceful means to accomplish your goals. > > I’d go further into this, but I just had a rather large pile of invoicing get dumped on my desk and sadly I’m going to actually have to work for my paycheck today. I’ll try and come back later, time permitting. The U.S. Constitution guarantees both the rights of free speech and free assembly. There is no restriction regarding exercising both of these rights at the same time. Think of the groups in history that you would be against with this philosophy: - Abolitionists - Suffragettes - Civil Rights protesters ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2017, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443/723 "2017-04-18T20:26:51Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > Alright. If you think violent protest to shut down that sort of speech is a useful and valid tactic I won’t be able to convince you otherwise. Let’s just see how effective it is overtime. > > I think it’s counter productive. I also think the precedent of violent suppression of speech can be used against what you’d like to say as well. **At which point, the merit of the idea no longer matters**. What matters is who can assemble the most violent mob. (Bolding mine) Um… Buddy, if you think the merit of the idea has mattered in quite some time, I feel the need to remind you that we’re talking about people like Robert Spencer and Milo Yiannopolous. If the merit of the ideas at play mattered, we wouldn’t be having this discussion, because universities (and CPAC) wouldn’t have invited the human embodiment of a cross between 4chan, the youtube comments section, and an slaughterhouse runoff pipe to speak. And wouldn’t that be a nice world to live in. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2017, 8:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443/724 "2017-04-18T20:38:40Z")
> [@Rick\_Sanchez](#): > > Okay…so, in this analogy, I represent the university, right? If so, it follows that I would only invite people to speak at my house for the edification of my kids. So if _all_ my kids objected to my inviting a speaker to my house, I probably wouldn’t invite him, because I’d have absolutely no reason to. If, however, some of my kids _did_ want to hear the speaker and the rest of my kids _didn’t_, I’d turn to the ones who _didn’t_ want to hear the speaker and say _“Look, some of your brothers and sisters think they will learn something from this guest. It’s unfair to them for me to disinvite the guest just because you are offended by his views. Besides, if you find his views offensive, the best way to combat them is to hear them in his own words and question him directly. Furthermore, if I disinvite the guest because you’re offended by his views, what happens when you want me to invite a guest and your brothers and sisters demand I disinvite him because they’re offended, too? You wouldn’t like that, would you? So how about you treat your brothers and sisters the way you yourselves would like to be treated and let them listen to their speaker. Make your displeasure known, by all means, but don’t keep the guest from speaking.”_ > > Then I’d sit in my armchair by the fire and smoke a pipe or something. All very reasonable but lacks any nuance. When we like or dislike someone/something it is on a spectrum and not an either/or thing. Your decision making does not take into account just how passionate people can feel about certain topics. What if your daughter had escaped a religious cult where she had been abused but your sons are really keen on hearing what the cult leader has to say and wants him to come over for dinner? Will you give your daughter that speech above? ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2017, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443/725 "2017-04-18T20:44:44Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > All very reasonable but lacks any nuance. > > When we like or dislike someone/something it is on a spectrum and not an either/or thing. > > Your decision making does not take into account just how passionate people can feel about certain topics. What if your daughter had escaped a religious cult where she had been abused but your sons are really keen on hearing what the cult leader has to say and wants him to come over for dinner? Will you give your daughter that speech above? Or, what if your guest speaker spends the time telling your sons what sluts your daughters are, and how they shouldn’t be respected, and if they get raped, well, they shouldn’t be such sluts. I am sure your sons will appreciate it, but was it really a platform you should have given? ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2017, 11:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443/726 "2017-04-18T23:42:28Z")
…Milo is a troll. He says, does and writes things to cause a reaction. Early in his career he attacked gamers. Then gamergate came along. And he saw an opportunity to make money so he began to celebrate gamers. He is an opportunist. He is a capitalist. He doesn’t believe a word he says. Which is why most of the stuff he says is contradictory nonsense. He has no moral fibre. The Straightdope has a straightforward policy on dealing with trolls. It denies them a platform. If they troll they get banned. Threads and posts get deleted. And it works. Genuine posters, no matter how extreme their views, are allowed to post here. We have both open racists and communists posting here. Budget Player Cadet has posted about some of the hit pieces Milo has written for Breitbart. I’ve gone through several of them debunking them: and they are composed of exaggerations, half-truths and outright lies. And these people that Milo targeted: they are nobodies. If you follow their twitter feeds they spend most of their time talking about Overwatch and playing with their dogs. Milo elevated these “nobodies” to infamous status. He declared them “guilty” and his pack of raging followers harass them to this day. Some of them moved across country because they got doxxed and they needed to start fresh. Milo is responsible for destroying these peoples lives. No reputable newspaper would hire Milo. If Milo were on these boards he would have been banned in an hour. If he acted the way he acted on twitter in the workplace he would have been fired on the spot. He is a serial harasser who harassed for no other reason than the lolz. So I want everyone to get a bit of perspective here. The Milo protests were not just aimed at “shutting Milo down.” They were aimed at the Universities, at the Campuses, at the people who extended the invitation to Milo to talk. Why are you giving a serial harasser a platform? There are millions of people that you could have given the opportunity to speak. There are millions of people you chose not to ask speak in favour of the person who called Leslie Jones a “Black Dude.” When Twitter finally shut down Milo’s account the waves of harassment anecdotally (based on the accounts that I follow) went down as well. Denying him a platform worked. The people that Milo targeted are still gobsmacked at what finally bought Milo down. Out of all the horrible, cruel, nasty things Milo has done or said, he was bought down because he trolled a bit too far. His “outrageousness” just too outrageous for his ultra-conservative followers. People no longer invite Milo to speak. And that hasn’t hurt free-speech one bit. ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2017, 12:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443/727 "2017-04-19T00:00:39Z")
NY Times opinion piece gets it right. [https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/18/opinion/richard-spencers-right-to-speak-at-auburn.html?\_r=0](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/18/opinion/richard-spencers-right-to-speak-at-auburn.html?_r=0) Sad that people on this board are still denying that the violent protesters are wrong. Universities are not disinvited get people because they are afraid a peaceful protest with some dope smoking drum banging hippies may occur. Universities are banning people, illegally, because of the real threat of violence. At some point, pro free speech people are going to respond in kind. ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2017, 12:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443/728 "2017-04-19T00:09:34Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > Sad that people on this board are still denying that the violent protesters are wrong. …people support legal protesting. Not violent protesting. Can you name the people that are supporting violent protesting please? Call them out, so that we can shame them. Boooo. Hisssss. Stop being so vague. Please be specific. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2017, 12:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443/729 "2017-04-19T00:33:16Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > Sad that people on this board are still denying that the violent protesters are wrong. Who? We’ve asked you many times. Who is “denying that the violent protesters are wrong”? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2017, 1:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443/730 "2017-04-19T01:51:57Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > …At some point, pro free speech people are going to respond in kind. Ooh, a threat! Are they gonna start smoking dope and banging drums too? Groovy. ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2017, 4:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443/731 "2017-04-19T04:12:20Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > NY Times opinion piece gets it right. [https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/18/opinion/richard-spencers-right-to-speak-at-auburn.html?\_r=0](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/18/opinion/richard-spencers-right-to-speak-at-auburn.html?_r=0) > > Sad that people on this board are still denying that the violent protesters are wrong. Universities are not disinvited get people because they are afraid a peaceful protest with some dope smoking drum banging hippies may occur. Universities are banning people, illegally, because of the real threat of violence. > > At some point, pro free speech people are going to respond in kind. Yes, please, keep defending the rights of literal neo-nazis to have access to specific, prestigious platforms. I’m sure this ends real well for both you and society. Speaking as someone living in Germany, I can safely say that we have both a free and open democracy _and_ common-sense protections that prevent fascists from taking hold, such as refusing to protect dangerous, violent, anti-democratic ideologies the same way we protect other ideologies. Because, as we learned the hard way, “debate” doesn’t quite fucking cut it when it comes to nazis and preventing their shitty, dangerous, _genocidal_ ideas from gaining power. And every single time a “pro free speech” person decides to go to bat for Richard “peaceful ethnic cleansing” Spencer, they lose credibility. ---
**Author:** ![Leaper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/4bbf92/32.png) [@Leaper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaper)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2017, 4:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443/732 "2017-04-19T04:50:13Z")
Well, from the perspective of this American poster, as I said before, more people might buy the principle thing if it didn’t have a suspicious tendency to only show up for some people when “alt right” speech is being discussed, and not, say, flag burning or kneeling during the national anthem. As it is, if you’re exclusively defending Nazis and fascists when their free speech isn’t heard, well, people are gonna wonder. ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2017, 4:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443/733 "2017-04-19T04:52:47Z")
> [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > Yes, please, keep defending the rights of literal neo-nazis to have access to specific, prestigious platforms. I’m sure this ends real well for both you and society. Speaking as someone living in Germany, I can safely say that we have both a free and open democracy _and_ common-sense protections that prevent fascists from taking hold, such as refusing to protect dangerous, violent, anti-democratic ideologies the same way we protect other ideologies. Because, as we learned the hard way, “debate” doesn’t quite fucking cut it when it comes to nazis and preventing their shitty, dangerous, _genocidal_ ideas from gaining power. And every single time a “pro free speech” person decides to go to bat for Richard “peaceful ethnic cleansing” Spencer, they lose credibility. Ohh the scary neo-Nazis! Well, I’m fine with them speaking. Just as I’m fine with nutty religious people speaking. And no, people don’t lose credibility advocating freedom of speech you dimwit. People lose credibility when they are hysterical hypocrites. Plus if you paid attention in history class you’d remember the Nazis, communists, etc didn’t rise to power by debating their opponents. They rose to power through violence, intimidation, and the violation of the rights of others. Ironic isn’t it. And what’s with antifa types dressing as they were doing live action D&D? Dude had a trash can lid for a shield. Lol. [x.com](https://mobile.twitter.com/TheSaintPepe/status/854475945402552320/video/1) ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2017, 4:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443/734 "2017-04-19T04:56:45Z")
> [@Leaper](#): > > Well, from the perspective of this American poster, as I said before, more people might buy the principle thing if it didn’t have a suspicious tendency to only show up for some people when “alt right” speech is being discussed, and not, say, flag burning or kneeling during the national anthem. As it is, if you’re exclusively defending Nazis and fascists when their free speech isn’t heard, well, people are gonna wonder. That’s because it’s contentious. Damn, people are slow on this board. If the topic wasn’t contentious there wouldn’t need to be any advocacy for free speech. “Oh look! A beautiful bird!” That is an example of speech no one will critique and thus needs no defending. You are putting forth a catch-22 style argument and it’s transparently dishonest. I’d have the same advocacy if alt-left or other nutty groups on the left were invited to speak and goons from the right burned down the university and beat people. But since those actions are from folks on the left then that’s who I’m going to criticize. ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2017, 5:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443/735 "2017-04-19T05:09:09Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > Ohh the scary neo-Nazis! Well, I’m fine with them speaking. Just as I’m fine with nutty religious people speaking. And no, people don’t lose credibility advocating freedom of speech you dimwit. People lose credibility when they are hysterical hypocrites. There’s nothing hypocritical about expecting your right to speak to end where you start saying, “[Maybe we should talk more about whether black genocide is a good idea, and if so, how we would do it](https://twitter.com/blackautonomist/status/822818627523117056?lang=en)”. The specific quote is not directly from Richard Spencer, but it was published in a magazine he runs. It’s entirely possible to have both free speech and reasonable limits on what you can say in the public sphere. _Especially_ if we’re talking about a venue like a goddamn university. Or, to put it another way, many western democracies - [in fact, _most_ western democracies](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_against_Holocaust_denial) - have specific laws against denying the holocaust. Is France a country without free speech? Germany? Belgium? Austria? Australia? > [@](#): > > Plus if you paid attention in history class you’d remember the Nazis, communists, etc didn’t rise to power by debating their opponents. They rose to power through violence, intimidation, and the violation of the rights of others. Ironic isn’t it. They didn’t debate. They had no use for debate. But they sure as hell spoke. Hitler won over a third of the german electorate before the Machtergreifung - in a pluralistic system like they had in Weimar, that’s a pretty substantial number. And they rose to that level of power in no small part because they were able to spread their ideas, and because debate and discussion were worthless tools against prejudice and hatred. Nowadays, in Germany, if a party goes in that direction, we ban that party. Because we are not repeating that mistake. The country is better off for it. The fact that the overton window is fixed firmly in a position _against_ fascism by law is a good thing. > [@](#): > > And what’s with antifa types dressing as they were doing live action D&D? Dude had a trash can lid for a shield. Lol. [x.com](https://mobile.twitter.com/TheSaintPepe/status/854475945402552320/video/1) Two words: “based stickman”. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2017, 5:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443/736 "2017-04-19T05:16:59Z")
> [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > There’s nothing hypocritical about expecting your right to speak to end where you start saying, “[Maybe we should talk more about whether black genocide is a good idea, and if so, how we would do it](https://twitter.com/blackautonomist/status/822818627523117056?lang=en)”. The specific quote is not directly from Richard Spencer, but it was published in a magazine he runs. It’s entirely possible to have both free speech and reasonable limits on what you can say in the public sphere. _Especially_ if we’re talking about a venue like a goddamn university. I disagree. And the law sides with my point of view. As it should. > [@](#): > > Or, to put it another way, many western democracies - [in fact, _most_ western democracies](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_against_Holocaust_denial) - have specific laws against denying the holocaust. Is France a country without free speech? Germany? Belgium? Austria? Australia? Obviously not. And I’d rather have nutty ideas being expressed than live in a country that forbids it. > [@](#): > > They didn’t debate. They had no use for debate. But they sure as hell spoke. Hitler won over a third of the german electorate before the Machtergreifung - in a pluralistic system like they had in Weimar, that’s a pretty substantial number. And they rose to that level of power in no small part because they were able to spread their ideas, and because debate and discussion were worthless tools against prejudice and hatred. Nowadays, in Germany, if a party goes in that direction, we ban that party. Because we are not repeating that mistake. The country is better off for it. The fact that the overton window is fixed firmly in a position _against_ fascism by law is a good thing. > > Two words: “based stickman”. :rolleyes: Germany is making a mistake. ---
**Author:** ![Leaper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/4bbf92/32.png) [@Leaper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaper)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2017, 5:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443/737 "2017-04-19T05:21:29Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > That’s because it’s contentious. And flag burning and Colin Kaepernick weren’t…? ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2017, 5:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443/738 "2017-04-19T05:26:31Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > Obviously not. And I’d rather have nutty ideas being expressed than live in a country that forbids it. > > Germany is making a mistake. Okay, let’s try something different. What if, instead of being a fascist douchebag, Richard Spencer was, instead, an ISIS recruiter? Never committed a terrorist attack. Never hurt anyone. Just casually espoused the idea that we should debate whether or not the correct path is just murdering all the infidels via beheading, and recommended that people join his jihadi crusade and blow up buildings. Does free speech still apply there? And if so: _what the fuck is wrong with you?_ Honestly, if you think that _most of Europe_, and indeed most first-world democracies don’t have free speech, then I think you need to revise your expectations of free speech down a bit. This is like arguing that America doesn’t have free speech because of harassment laws. Yeah, we made it illegal to deny quite possibly the single greatest and most well-documented atrocity in the history of humanity. So. Fucking. What? Free speech is not an end unto itself. It is a _means_ to an end. A way of ensuring a just, free society. And your freeze peach bullshit is not helping that end. ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2017, 5:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443/739 "2017-04-19T05:34:13Z")
> [@Leaper](#): > > And flag burning and Colin Kaepernick weren’t…? I never critiqued either. I actually posted support of Kaepernic, iirc. I’m not a fan of forced patriotism. So what’s your point? You think because I advocate for freedom of speech I’m a nutty authoritarian? What a twisted world we live in. ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2017, 5:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443/740 "2017-04-19T05:36:12Z")
> [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > Okay, let’s try something different. What if, instead of being a fascist douchebag, Richard Spencer was, instead, an ISIS recruiter? Never committed a terrorist attack. Never hurt anyone. Just casually espoused the idea that we should debate whether or not the correct path is just murdering all the infidels via beheading, and recommended that people join his jihadi crusade and blow up buildings. Does free speech still apply there? And if so: _what the fuck is wrong with you?_ > > Honestly, if you think that _most of Europe_, and indeed most first-world democracies don’t have free speech, then I think you need to revise your expectations of free speech down a bit. This is like arguing that America doesn’t have free speech because of harassment laws. Yeah, we made it illegal to deny quite possibly the single greatest and most well-documented atrocity in the history of humanity. So. Fucking. What? Free speech is not an end unto itself. It is a _means_ to an end. A way of ensuring a just, free society. And your freeze peach bullshit is not helping that end. Well I and the courts disagree. And Europe obviously doesn’t. Which is why retarded shit like this can occur. [https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/european-parliament-lifts-marine-le-pens-immunity-for-tweeting-gruesome-images-of-violence/2017/03/02/99bb9c9a-ff5e-11e6-9b78-824ccab94435\_story.html?utm\_term=.6cf800623047](https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/european-parliament-lifts-marine-le-pens-immunity-for-tweeting-gruesome-images-of-violence/2017/03/02/99bb9c9a-ff5e-11e6-9b78-824ccab94435_story.html?utm_term=.6cf800623047) Funny that you trust the state to restrict speech. That will end well. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443.md?page=36) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443.md?page=38)