Mark Meechan aka Count Dankula fined £800 for Nazi dog video
133 replies, posted
So when someone goes through an appeal, who looks over it? Would it be the same judge as before or someone else?
As much as the free speech implications concern me, I have zero sympathy for anyone on the alt right getting punished for their views
These threads make it really obvious who gives a shit about free speech and who only cares about their own right to speak.
He isn't getting punished for his views.
"as much as free speech matters to me i am very much enjoying this guy getting punished for it!"
Congratulations, you are now just as stupid as the court system doing this
If you think that he is "alt-right", then the way you classify people politically is way more fucked up than his joke.
He’s not alt-right, so congragulations you don’t actually care about free speech. You care about speech that you agree with.
So, just "I have zero sympathy for anyone on the alt right getting punished for their views" then?
That's not very fair. I think that the alt-right is a threat not just to everyone's free speech, but to everyone's safety as well. I think it's right that Europe criminalizes association with nazi parties and nazi iconography.
He's not fucking alt-right and that video wasn't anything pro-altright in anyway for gods sake, ignoring the fact your POV is twisted you're not even correct in the first place.
"criminalizes assocation with nazi iconography"
Oh yeah because the symbols of the Nazis are 100% the Nazis and can never be anything else
Rest in peicies being able to use hundereds of symbols that don't mean Nazism literally everywhere on else on this planet
I'd rather not have Germany's insane anti-swastika laws thanks
I'd like to look up some example videos but I can't rn cause I'm at work, but iirc he had some pretty right wing videos on his channel. But other than that I think you might want to calm down a bit, it's not a big deal it's just an internet forum
Lets just throw you in the gulag to be safe, after all you used the word "nazi" and "sympathy" in the same post and therefore you might sympathize with nazis. I have decided this context for you and you're not allowed to contest it :^)
I think your views are dangerous. If it were just the views themselves the comparison would be different, but in the context of which views are more likely to actually gain traction i feel like your views are far more dangerous than any KKK tier garbage.
You're trying to come up with some argument along the lines of "no that's not what I mean I support free speech" and then pretty much following it up with "but i don't support free speech". It's completely fair to make that judgement about your comment. Make the informed decision to show your disapproval about hate speech and not freedom of speech, nobody should be punished for talking about any of their views unless it causes objective harm - making a cute dog do a Nazi salute is not harmful. Any other viewpoint, similar to your own, fundamentally is not in support of freedom of speech and is in my opinion backwards in a progressive society. Silencing others and being supportive of punishing people's viewpoints is exactly what steers us into fascist practices, regardless of whatever positive intent is meant to be behind it. That practice is also what builds up activism and anger within those who have been silenced, which surely would not be a good outcome?
They wasted HIS time and money.
Holy intellectual dishonesty, batman!
Really, you think the idea that an $800 fine is an appropriate punishment for someone harboring alt-right views is as bad a terrorist organization which killed hundreds if not thousands of innocent people for over a century? Are laws banning smoking in bars comparable to Al Qaeda?
Okay, I'll accept that what I'm against is "hate speech". I don't personally think that the dog video itself is hate speech, but I think that his other videos are hate speech (once again, at work, can't find any examples unless I'm completely thinking of the wrong youtuber)
You don't know the context because you're too lazy to check, but they force-decided the context in their own favor in the case, that's the point. A court has levied a criminal charge while intentionally disregarding context. If he was an actual alt right nazi this would still be an awful case, but the key here is that he isn't, the court is full of shit, and if this goes through without appeal it means they can do this to anyone in any context because this is a precedent that what you actually mean doesn't matter.
If we want to talk intellectual dishonesty or duplicity we can talk about how you attempted to re-frame my argument in the second quote. No, an $800 fine is not worse than the KKK's history. Yes, in the modern day the KKK's ideaology is pretty weak and i feel it has a small chance of gaining additional traction, it's hit its maximum if you will, while your brand of fascist authoritarian censorship and prosecution is subtle enough to potentially go somewhere. This point is up for debate, but i simply want to give my view here because, what you're failing to understand is that if you create the authoritarian society people want, eventually people you disagree with will be in power and you'll be the schmoe in the gulag rather than the people you don't mind getting fucked over for their youtube jokes.
You've not really acknowledged or answered any of the objections I have to your viewpoint, I want to know what your response is. It's not about the person, but about the core principal.
Just look at yourself, man.
"I enjoy him getting fined for the dog video, which I don't think is hate speech, but because of his views, even though I am not sure he's alt-right"
Oh yeah, that alt-right, a broad term that doesn't mean much concrete. Better fucking punish these bastards!
Yeah like I said I'm at work, I can't be looking up videos like that. The dog video isn't hate speech but I think if someone goes online and posts videos endorsing alt-right politics then if the technicality they get him on is one video or the other, I don't care what the particulars of the video are the point is to prosecute people who commit hate speech crimes. Once again, I may be wrong about this particular youtuber now that I'm reading these comments so if I am, then nevermind, I'm big enough to admit that I was wrong.
" I think if someone goes online and posts videos endorsing alt-right politics then ... the point is to prosecute people who commit hate speech crimes."
You're still not getting the point. Alt-right views aren't hate speech. They are, in my opinion, completely backwards and should be laughed at by anyone who is a functioning member of a western society. They shouldn't be silenced, because that goes against what western democracies stand for. This is why I have an issue, it's not because of mark meechan, it's because of your questionable views that have been reinforced by your enthusiasm to silence those you hastily label as alt-right. Change alt-right to black liberation, and that would've been the case back in the 50s in the states. Do you see the issue?
then they should be prosecuted for an actual hate speech crime instead of some stupid random shit that will instead carry with it the implication that blatant harmless jokes could land you in deep shit. if the guy really is spewing hate crimes left and right then that shouldn't be a problem..
again, there's nothing worth celebrating here. it doesn't matter if he really did do something bad previously somewhere else. Trying to make an example out of him over this video is ridiculous, accomplishes nothing, and carries with it the possibility of other people getting fucked over.
Let's all agree that the real villain in this situation is
b-but you broke the law
That's called "Appeal to authority" mate and it's a logical fallacy
Remember back when people posted it in Lmao pics? Look how far we've came
You are entirely wrong. Dude isn't alt-right, he's literally taking the piss out of Nazis in a way that has actually been done before during the reign of the Nazis in europe. You're literally just making stuff up to villainize someone for something you don't understand at all.
So you are not even sure who you are talking about and you don't really know what your definition of hate speech or free speech is
why even posts anything at this point you can not even say it is because you don't like the guy because you said you don't even know. there is no rational process behind what you are shitting out into this thread. shit in your diaper next time where it belongs
No, he's just trying to justify this guy getting penalized because he doesn't like the meme videos this guys puts out. He's trying to do this by conflating the memes with his personal political opinion, which if he knew about, he would realize that he was wrong.
But in the end, it doesn't matter. He just wants to see people who post these memes on the internet punished for it.
I don't care if he is a literal neo-nazi, you are absolutely a fool for thinking this is in any way acceptable just because he's a part of the 'not my own' political party
Like holy shit lmao. If they can use a totally and absolutely out of context thing against someone, they can use it against anyone, yes, even people on 'your side' in your perspective. Someone who is a bleeding heart egalitarian socialist could have a joke taken out of context and be fined for it.
He's not even alt-right either, which makes it even more hilarious that you're justifying this.
I have not seen you once have any concern for free speech. And the fact that you still can't get the idea that Count IS NOT alt-right after numerous threads and posts though your skull just shows how much you actually don't care.
He's not alt right, his pug is alt right.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.