The Conservative Cave
Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: dutch508 on September 22, 2017, 11:24:45 PM
-
jcmaine72 (135 posts) https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029608062
If only we had European-style Hate Speech Laws on the books, we wouldn't have a white supremacist in
the White House. I firmly believe that to be a fact. He would've been arrested the day after he first opened that scum hole under his nose during the campaign and began spewing hate.
Yeah, I know there are First Amendment implications to consider. However, I consider what he does is to be more akin to incitement to violence, with what occurred in Charlottesville being a prime example of that. Every white supremacist and penny-ante Nazi has been emboldened by this egregious man's toxic presence in the WH.
The other argument I constantly against the implementation of comprehensive Hate Speech Laws revolves around who gets to decide what constitutes hate speech and why. I honestly don't know the answer to that question. However, I'd like to know how is it possible for the Europeans to somehow enforce these laws sensibly and logically but we're somehow incapable of doing the same. Are we dumber than they are? Less civilized?
I dunno. I'm of the opinion that both Hate Speech and Hate Crime laws (which we do, thankfully, have) promotes a level of decency and humanity that all nations should aspire to. Without them, it just seems that we're giving possibly the worst element of our society free reign to verbally terrorize others based on who they are and engage in dangerous, vitriolic demagoguery.
Where am I going wrong here?
Jesus... :thatsright:
Iggo (35,578 posts)
1. Where are you going wrong?
Being anti-first-amendment.
That's where.
jcmaine72 (135 posts)
4. Thanks for putting words in my mouth.
I guess that ten paragraph diatribe I obviously posted above in which I called for its abolition gave me away, right?
This might come as a shock to you, but some of our constitutional amendments have been subject to different interpretations at different times. It's part of the genius of our Constitution - its generational adaptability and flexibility...within reason, of course. I don't see how labeling Hate Speech as an act of violence is against the spirit of the First Amendment.
See how easy that was? I was able to express my opinion without insulting you or resorting to dismissive, condescending language. Neat trick, eh?
**** off.
jcmaine72 (135 posts)
10. Can you please show me where I specifically called for getting rid of freedom of speech?
That's quite a leap you made there. Absolutely kangaroo like. Because I believe hate speech should be interpreted legally as an act of violence or incitement to violence, that somehow means to you that I'm against free speech. Remarkable.
Well, I guess we have nowhere to go from there, do we?
Star Member WinkyDink (49,920 posts)
6. Oh, brother. To dismiss the 1st Amendment with "Yeah, I know...."
Star Member WinkyDink (49,920 posts)
55. Brevity is the soul of wit. It is YOU about whom I wonder, re: "bothered posting at all." NOTHING
YOU COULD WRITE, NOTHING, AND NO AMOUNT OF VERBIAGE, NONE, CAN JUSTIFY ANY OF YOUR PREMISE. ANY.
Your PREMISE, in case you are unaware, is your opening dependent clause: "If only we had European-style Hate Speech Laws on the books...."
The rest of your post makes unproven claims (that the Euros somehow prosecute these laws ably); ridiculous assumptive queries (that, without having and enforcing such laws so admirably equitably, Americans are less intelligent, less "civilized" ) ; and a specious "legal argument" (that despicable speech, currently protected by the First Amendment, is inciteful to riot, without actually exhorting a crowd TO so riot).
How's THAT for "context"?
So no, you do not come out and suggest the abolition of the First Amendment. You simply seek its gutting.
mythology (7,205 posts)
11. You do realize there are far right parties in Europe right?
Take Alternative for Germany which actively wants to ban Muslims and forbid building mosques.
In France, the Nationalist Front had nazi sympathizers as some of their founders and the founder is openly anti-Semitic and racist, including denying the Holocaust. In the last round of national elections, they won a plurality of the first round of voting.
In the Netherlands, the Party for Freedom wants to ban Islam and record the ethnic makeup of all Dutch citizens. Yes Geert Wilders has been prosecuted, but so far unsuccessfully.
The Golden Dawn party still exists in Greece in spite of calling for an ethnically pure nation. And this is a party that has had leaders arrested for murder.
Jobbik in Hungary wants to not hush up the "zionist conspiracy".
The People's Party Our Slovakia is led by a guy who thinks the former Slovakian leader Tiso who sent many thousands of Jewish people to concentration camps was a swell guy.
I think you greatly over estimate what would have happened.
Star Member Demsrule86 (15,580 posts)
95. When you ban some forms of speech for what is essentially political reasons, the first amendment
is dead...and imagine what the GOP would do with something like that.
EllieBC (640 posts)
29. I never understand why anyone thinks this is a good idea.
As a Jew I can tell you that no amount of hate speech laws protect anyone. Ask Jews in Europe who are under attack from the usual wannabe Nazis and when they are victims of crimes by others it's said to not be antisemitism.
All hate speech laws do is drive things underground where they fester and grow and become worse.
And yes yes, they'd take away Game of Thrones too.
tritsofme (12,616 posts)
36. Swell idea. Let's give the Justice Department, headed by one Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III
The power to decide who is prosecuted for "hate speech"
What could possibly go wrong?
Star Member ileus (15,194 posts)
103. Our side should get to author what is hate speech.
If we go about it properly, the Right won't be able to say or pen one of their ideas without fear.
First we have to get complete power again...
holy ****...
-
Star Member ileus (15,194 posts)
103. Our side should get to author what is hate speech.
If we go about it properly, the Right won't be able to say or pen one of their ideas without fear.
First we have to get complete power again...
And yet, WE are the fascists...
Un-f'n-believable... :banghead: :mental: :thatsright:
It's not often you meet a kindergarten dropout...
-
If only we didn't beat the British in the Revolution...
...We'd be just as FUBAR as England is today.
-
And yet, WE are the fascists...
Un-f'n-believable... :banghead: :mental: :thatsright:
It's not often you meet a kindergarten dropout...
Took the words out of my brain. That was a disgusting post by the DUmmy.
Hate speech to DUmmies is whatever they disagree with.
-
If they banned hate speech everyone at the dump would be in jail, I guess they don't read their posts. :lmao:
-
jcmaine72 (135 posts) https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029608062
If only we had European-style Hate Speech Laws on the books, we wouldn't have a white supremacist in
the White House. I firmly believe that to be a fact. He would've been arrested the day after he first opened that scum hole under his nose during the campaign and began spewing hate.
Since LPC Noob jcmaine72's premise is contrary to fact on multiple points, the best response would probably be, "Yes, I will have okra fries with my anchovy milkshake."
-
1. Well the British, much like Hillary didn't win. So tough.
2. You will never ever kill conservatism in this nation.
3. Finally, even if you leftist fascists ever reached the point where you could shut us out completely we'll burn this nation to the ground and go to war to wipe you out before letting you have it.
-
" However, I consider what he does is to be more akin to incitement to violence, with what occurred in Charlottesville being a prime example of that."
He did not directly incite any kind of violence or bigotry, so it is protected under the First Amendment. By your logic, or lack thereof, the following people could also be arrested and charged with Hate Crimes:
1. Al Sharpton. His hateful, racist, and anti- Semitic words directly incited the Crown Heights Riots and the Freddy's Fashion Mart incident.
2. Al Gore. James Jay Lee (The radical environmentalist nutjob who a few years ago held three people hostage in the Discovery Channel office building before being gunned down by the police) was directly inspired/ motivated to commit that action by Gore's works, especially 'An Inconvenient Truth.' btw, have I mentioned how happy I am that Gore's recent sequel to that crockumentary was a miserable bomb in the box office?
3. Michael Moore. In 2002, a Jihadist cell launched a suicide- bombing attack against a nightclub in Bali, Indonesia that killed a lot of people, mostly Australian tourists. When the cell's ringleader was caught and interrogated by the police, he said he orchestrated the bombing because he saw "A lot of whiteys dancing there and a lot of whiteys drinking there." When he went on trial, his lawyer relied on the standard liberal tactic of portraying his client as a brave and noble hero taking a righteous stand against Western racism/ Islamophobia/ Imperialism. In his arguments, he cited a wide variety of anti- Western books, including Michael Moore's book 'Stupid White Men,' which coincidentally has a chapter entitled "Kill Whitey."
4. Earth First's leaders and the writers/ editors of 'The Earth First Journal.' Ted Kaczynski, aka the Unabomber, selected his victims because they were associated with companies on Earth First's "Eco- F&cker Hit List," including at least one completely innocent man who was targeted because an issue of 'The Earth First Journal' falsely accused his company of aiding in a crime against the environment.
"Star Member ileus (15,194 posts)
103. Our side should get to author what is hate speech.
If we go about it properly, the Right won't be able to say or pen one of their ideas without fear.
First we have to get complete power again..."
Ok, this is a terrifying sentiment.
What this DUchebag is proposing would be sheer, unabashed tyranny, of the sort that led to the creation of the world's Hitlers, Stalins, Maos, Pol Pots, etc..
-
" However, I consider what he does is to be more akin to incitement to violence, with what occurred in Charlottesville being a prime example of that."
He did not directly incite any kind of violence or bigotry, so it is protected under the First Amendment. By your logic, or lack thereof, the following people could also be arrested and charged with Hate Crimes:
1. Al Sharpton. His hateful, racist, and anti- Semitic words directly incited the Crown Heights Riots and the Freddy's Fashion Mart incident.
2. Al Gore. James Jay Lee (The radical environmentalist nutjob who a few years ago held three people hostage in the Discovery Channel office building before being gunned down by the police) was directly inspired/ motivated to commit that action by Gore's works, especially 'An Inconvenient Truth.' btw, have I mentioned how happy I am that Gore's recent sequel to that crockumentary was a miserable bomb in the box office?
3. Michael Moore. In 2002, a Jihadist cell launched a suicide- bombing attack against a nightclub in Bali, Indonesia that killed a lot of people, mostly Australian tourists. When the cell's ringleader was caught and interrogated by the police, he said he orchestrated the bombing because he saw "A lot of whiteys dancing there and a lot of whiteys drinking there." When he went on trial, his lawyer relied on the standard liberal tactic of portraying his client as a brave and noble hero taking a righteous stand against Western racism/ Islamophobia/ Imperialism. In his arguments, he cited a wide variety of anti- Western books, including Michael Moore's book 'Stupid White Men,' which coincidentally has a chapter entitled "Kill Whitey."
4. Earth First's leaders and the writers/ editors of 'The Earth First Journal.' Ted Kaczynski, aka the Unabomber, selected his victims because they were associated with companies that Earth First's "Eco- F&cker Hit List," including at least one completely innocent man who was targeted because an issue of 'The Earth First Journal' falsely accused his company of aiding in a crime against the environment.
"Star Member ileus (15,194 posts)
103. Our side should get to author what is hate speech.
If we go about it properly, the Right won't be able to say or pen one of their ideas without fear.
First we have to get complete power again..."
Ok, this is a terrifying sentiment.
What this DUchebag is proposing would be sheer, unabashed tyranny, of the sort that led to the creation of the world's Hitlers, Stalins, Maos, Pol Pots, etc..
5. The SPLC: The SPLC's listing of the Family Research Council as a "hate group" inspired Floyd Corkins' attempt to murder multiple FRC staff people.
-
If we get like the British or Europeans who will come to the rescue and bail them out next time they get invaded?
-
Carl is convinced that Ileus likes to poke the hive with outrageous statements. Sometimes I wonder.
-
If we would have had European-style hate speech legislation "on the books," we would all be dead by now, with a bunch of Arab scum enforcing Sharia Law all over OUR would-be country. ****in' ingrates at DU.
-
Star Member ileus (15,194 posts)
103. Our side should get to author what is hate speech.
If we go about it properly, the Right won't be able to say or pen one of their ideas without fear.
First we have to get complete power again...
And there we have it. This dummie put into the words the entire mindset of the libs in the dem party. Complete naked power and the resulting abuse thereof.
I find it quite refreshing that someone over there had the guts to actually post what all of them are thinking.
-
And there we have it. This dummie put into the words the entire mindset of the libs in the dem party. Complete naked power and the resulting abuse thereof.
I find it quite refreshing that someone over there had the guts to actually post what all of them are thinking.
We have all the power now.
I wonder how Ileus would feel if Trump suddenly did exactly as he suggested, and loudly proclaimed his thanks to Ileus for such a splendid idea?