Unite the Right Racist Scum

[Skywatcher]

@Spice_Weasel

I don’t think that’s what she’s saying. I think she’s saying that the only reason Okrahoma is not a Nazi is that he’s Jewish.

'Course, there are those who turn their backs on Judaism to be anti-Semitic. I even encountered a Jewish White Supremacist on the IMDb boards. Called himself BrianCT and, yes, he’s a conspiracy theorist.

[octopus]

@enipla

Afraid I can’t. Can you point out where it protects hate speech and inciting violence?

Does it specifically protect love speech? Indifferent speech? Confused speech? Happy speech? No?

The constitution doesn’t grant the government power to restrict speech and secondly there are two amendments reinforcing that concept.

[octopus]

@tomndebb

Yep. Because those calling for more violence are acting dumb and this is the Pit.

You, however, pretended to post a serious comment on the subject while misusing purported facts. This is still the Straight Dope and facts do matter.
(Cheer up. I am treating you as a serious poster while ignoring the several members of alt-right posting here on the grounds that they are incapable of actual thought.)

Alright I reread what you are referring to.

Pretend? No. Mildly hypocritical? I suppose so.

[Fuji]

Jesus, what a fucking dumpster fire of a country. Keep on fetishizing those 1st and 2nd Amendments. I’m sure things will turn out swimmingly…

[octopus]

@Fuji

Jesus, what a fucking dumpster fire of a country. Keep on fetishizing those 1st and 2nd Amendments. I’m sure things will turn out swimmingly…

Yep. Respecting the 1st amendment, which protects your rants as well, is such a fetish.

[silenus]

Hay! Number 1 is just fine. It’s Numbers 2, 19 and 26 that are the problem!

[Spice_Weasel]

I think a pattern I’m seeing all over these boards today is that there is a lot of talking at cross purposes and unwarranted assumptions. I’m seeing a wide range of positions here and a lot of resulting confusion. Among the varied posters:

1. People like me, who defend free speech for reprehensible assholes but think there is no way in hell there is a moral equivalence to be drawn between the clashing ideological groups.
2. People who are really concerned with protecting free speech and not as much concerned/outraged about the content of this particular speech as they are about the curtailment of civil liberties.
3. People who are really concerned with protecting free speech, but who are also ridiculous apologists for Trump and the right and who are basically throwing their souls in the trash by defending him and/or minimizing the sheer reprehensibility of the alt-right.
4. People who think Nazis should not have the legal right to free speech because they are really fucking pissed off.
5. People who think Nazis should not have the legal right to free speech because they have given this a lot of thought and would like to argue constitutional law.
6. People who think Nazis should be shot in the street.

I think a lot of us are getting confused about who is taking what position, positions are getting conflated and misunderstandings occurring all around.

Just a general observation.

[Fuji]

@octopus

Yep. Respecting the 1st amendment, which protects your rants as well, is such a fetish.

Doesn’t protect my rights, because I don’t live in that shithole anymore. It’s a fetish because you chide the Germans and Israelis for being “insecure”, when their restrictions on hate speech are actually quite reasonable. But leave it to Americans to take it to the extreme…

[Spice_Weasel]

@Clothahump

It says nothing whatsoever that indicates that the President is “a cowardly piece of racist-enabling shit”. Nice try, but massive fail on your part.

Let me ask you a question.

If the leader of a white supremacist movement publicly and enthusiastically declared his appreciation for your ongoing support and his desire to help you realize his goals, how would you respond?

[Fuji]

@Spice_Weasel

I think a pattern I’m seeing all over these boards today is that there is a lot of talking at cross purposes and unwarranted assumptions. I’m seeing a wide range of positions here and a lot of resulting confusion. Among the varied posters:

1. People like me, who defend free speech for reprehensible assholes but think there is no way in hell there is a moral equivalence to be drawn between the clashing ideological groups.
2. People who are really concerned with protecting free speech and not as much concerned/outraged about the content of this particular speech as they are about the curtailment of civil liberties.
3. People who are really concerned with protecting free speech, but who are also ridiculous apologists for Trump and the right and who are basically throwing their souls in the trash by defending him and/or minimizing the sheer reprehensibility of the alt-right.
4. People who think Nazis should not have the legal right to free speech because they are really fucking pissed off.
5. People who think Nazis should not have the legal right to free speech because they have given this a lot of thought and would like to argue constitutional law.
6. People who think Nazis should be shot in the street.

I think a lot of us are getting confused about who is taking what position, positions are getting conflated and misunderstandings occurring all around.

Just a general observation.

I’ll take No. 5, with a dash of No. 1, please.

[octopus]

@Fuji

Doesn’t protect my rights, because I don’t live in that shithole anymore. It’s a fetish because you chide the Germans and Israelis for being “insecure”, when their restrictions on hate speech are actually quite reasonable. But leave it to Americans to take it to the extreme…

What utopia do you live in? County Cork is in Ireland. Tell me about how Irish groups handle political disagreements.

[Fuji]

@octopus

What utopia do you live in? County Cork is in Ireland. Tell me about how Irish groups handle political disagreements.

Do your own homework. I’ll give you a hint - it doesn’t involve citizens carrying semi-automatic rifles in public while chanting for the death or subjugation of other citizens of a different ethnic background.

You know, you can have a perfectly nice country without tolerating the public presence of these shitheels and their fellow travelers. Canada, most of Europe, and the Pacific Rim manage to do so just fine.

[asahi]

@Fuji

Do your own homework. I’ll give you a hint - it doesn’t involve citizens carrying semi-automatic rifles in public while chanting for the death or subjugation of other citizens of a different ethnic background.

You know, you can have a perfectly nice country without tolerating the public presence of these shitheels and their fellow travelers. Canada, most of Europe, and the Pacific Rim manage to do so just fine.

But, but…freedumz.

[silenus]

@Fuji

I’ll take No. 5, with a dash of No. 1, please.

Fuck it. I’m going with #6, and maybe a touch of #7.

[octopus]

@Fuji

Do your own homework. I’ll give you a hint - it doesn’t involve citizens carrying semi-automatic rifles in public while chanting for the death or subjugation of other citizens of a different ethnic background.

You know, you can have a perfectly nice country without tolerating the public presence of these shitheels and their fellow travelers. Canada, most of Europe, and the Pacific Rim manage to do so just fine.

IRA ring a bell?

[octopus]

@silenus

Fuck it. I’m going with #6, and maybe a touch of #7.

@asahi

But, but…freedumz.

You all aren’t too bright.

Hope you never need a defense lawyer, a jury trial, protection from unlawful search or seizure or any other constitutional right.

[Fuji]

@octopus

IRA ring a bell?

:rolleyes: Gee, never saw that one coming…

Uh, since you’re not even aware of the distinction between the IRA and the PIRA, or the legality of either, I’m guessing you’re not familiar with the firearm laws of this country, either. Another hint - you can’t just buy a gun (rifle or shotgun) because you want one. You actually have to have a reason for doing so, with which the police must agree. And don’t even bother thinking about buying a legal handgun here - not gonna happen.

And America is better because?..

[Fuji]

@asahi

But, but…freedumz.

Yup. It’s all “USA! USA! USA! Fuck those commie Euro-fags! God loves America!”

[Fuji]

@octopus

You all aren’t too bright.

Hope you never need a defense lawyer, a jury trial, protection from unlawful search or seizure or any other constitutional right.

If I may paraphrase our dear friend doorhinge: Hahahahaha.

Yeah, the USA is really the place to keep my life or property secure. Good one. Thanks for the laugh!

[octopus]

@Fuji

:rolleyes: Gee, never saw that one coming…

Uh, since you’re not even aware of the distinction between the IRA and the PIRA, or the legality of either, I’m guessing you’re not familiar with the firearm laws of this country, either. Another hint - you can’t just buy a gun (rifle or shotgun) because you want one. You actually have to have a reason for doing so, with which the police must agree. And don’t even bother thinking about buying a legal handgun here - not gonna happen.

And America is better because?..

I don’t need the police’s permission to go to Wal-Mart and buy a rifle, a pistol, and a Diet Coke!