Poll: Most California Democrats want to restrict free speech from white nationalists - Polidicks

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;52687892]Are you done defending not being a Nazi by bringing up constant references to Nazis?[/QUOTE] This is like Trump levels of self-incrimination. Holy hell, lol...

real talk though Chaos 88 has some pretty good rhythm shame about the singer looking like a giant tool and being openly gay [QUOTE=Eva-1337;52681107]Like BDA said, big difference between groups that should and should not be protected by Freedom of Speech. "I hate black people" is protected. "Kill all black people" should not. It's unfortunate that there are still people who exhibit clear racism and racial supremacy, but it's a slippery slope when it comes to silencing people who are not actively promoting violence toward their fellow man. Still shitty though.[/QUOTE] I do hope that people don't try and censor racists out of legitimate nazi's being censored As shitty as hearing racists are, they're just kinda an annoyance but that's it. Suppressing racists universally is only going to make shit WAY worse.

[QUOTE=J!NX;52687932]real talk though Chaos 88 has some pretty good rhythm shame about the singer looking like a giant tool and being openly gay[/QUOTE] Are you forgetting one other important thing?

[QUOTE=Paramud;52687937]Are you forgetting one other important thing?[/QUOTE] At least he is a community leader and loves his fellow African Americans tho I hear his wife is Jewish and donates to the local holocaust memorials oh wait, that isn't true at all

Where do you people think this could go anyways? On one hand, we supress nazi/White nationalist ideas and they pull some victim complex shit, and become worse on the other hand, we ignore them and they also become worse we're fucked either way aren't we

[QUOTE=J!NX;52687947]Where do you people think this could go anyways? On one hand, we supress nazi/White nationalist ideas and they pull some victim complex shit, and become worse on the other hand, we ignore them and they also become worse we're fucked either way aren't we[/QUOTE] Take both options. The government continues allowing their free speech, and civilians continue pushing a hard resistance.

Oh yes, put a muzzle on people who already disenfranchised and angry and make them even more so. That will solve the problem for sure!

America's freedom of speech laws make dealing with troublesome forms of expression like hate speech a tricky minefield, because precedents must apply universally and there are slippery slopes waiting everywhere. But, as a Canadian and living in Canada where we (like basically every other nation in the world) have less-broad free speech laws, I've grown up in a land where such expressions of hate speech are [I]not[/I] permitted, and this has not been abused to cause widespread censorship of far-less deserving expressions. I have no doubt that there will have been incidents of abuse, because someone will always try anything, but there does not seem to be any lasting harm on the fabric of Canadian society. So... it's sort of difficult for me to sympathize with people specifically fighting to defend the free speech of Nazis, even though under the laws of the USA if they aren't creating a public threat they are on paper just as protected. I feel that the US Constitution needs to become a living document, or at least rewritten to reflect the needs of the Union in the modern day. Problem is there isn't a single politician in DC that I trust with the competence and uncorruptibility and neutrality to draft such an important document in a nonpartisan, liberty-focused way with an eye towards an optimistic and enlightened future. Even Bernie would stumble and write in some shit that didn't belong, in my opinion, even if I'd trust him more than most other politicians to guide America's future towards the utopia the original document's authors dreamed of.

Alright, back on topic. I just think we shouldnt give Nazis, such as people who have a reference to Heil Hitler in their username, a platform, such as an internet forum, to spout their racist bullshit.

[QUOTE=Kuro.;52687980]Oh yes, put a muzzle on people who already disenfranchised and angry and make them even more so. That will solve the problem for sure![/QUOTE] When their freedoms end up making others who are already disenfranchised and angry themselves feel more disenfranchised and in danger, what do you expect people to do? One side is very clearly far more in the wrong than the other side so whether they are disenfranchised or not simply letting them do what they want will only cause more problems.

snip

[QUOTE=J!NX;52687947]Where do you people think this could go anyways? On one hand, we supress nazi/White nationalist ideas and they pull some victim complex shit, and become worse on the other hand, we ignore them and they also become worse we're fucked either way aren't we[/QUOTE] Honestly, the issue of modern Nazism/white supremecy/ect. In the US is completely overblown. Its another classic case of a loud minority being given a voice by the media. The rally in Charleston took a year to organize and reports say that less than a hundred overall showed up the first night, and less than 300 total overall. The people that came to counterprotest outnumbered them severely. The point of them protesting was to preserve confederate monuments, and considering dozens have been taken down across the nation, they failed miserably. They have literally no power and when they unite they can't even succeed in a very basic and easy endeavor. They are universally hated across the US, and the world, and they're not really gaining any ground. How do you beat them? Hard to say, but this humble man thinks the best route is to ignore them and educate people why Nazis are wrong on every level. You remove their voice to the masses, you take away what little power they have to begin with. "But ignoring them and underestimating them is the thought process that got Trump elected!" Yea but its a completely different scenario. Trump got elected because he went up against a bunch of radical Christians in the primaries, then went up against the most hated woman in America in the election. The Nazis will never gain power in the US unless we slump into a depression worse than the one we suffered in the 30s.

[QUOTE=Funktastic Dog;52688015]I just think we shouldnt give x, such as people who have a reference to x in their username, a platform, such as an internet forum, to spout their x bullshit.[/QUOTE] You take the first step in removing someone's freedom of expression and you start a dangerous precedent. Replace X with anything else.

[QUOTE=WhiteGirl88;52689645]You take the first step in removing someone's freedom of expression and you start a dangerous precedent. Replace X with anything else.[/QUOTE] Yeah, poor nazis and white supremacists who can't preach hate and genocide

[QUOTE=gokiyono;52689773]Yeah, poor nazis and white supremacists who can't preach hate and genocide[/QUOTE] That's how precedents start. If a court rules in favor of censorship against one group, another can rule in favor to censor another group, and so on.

[QUOTE=WhiteGirl88;52689801]That's how precedents start. If a court rules in favor of censorship against one group, another can rule in favor to censor another group, and so on.[/QUOTE] Tell me about the dangerous suppression of free speech in Europe.

[QUOTE=Bertie;52689808]Tell me about the dangerous suppression of free speech in Europe.[/QUOTE] [url]http://diginomica.com/2017/05/24/eu-takes-first-step-slippery-slope-internet-censorship/[/url] [QUOTE]The European Union (EU) has signed off on the first steps towards greater regulation of the internet with a vote to establish a universal set of video content censorship rules that companies like Facebook and Twitter would be forced to follow.[/QUOTE] Besides, this is America we're talking about. Not Europe.

[QUOTE=WhiteGirl88;52689814][url]http://diginomica.com/2017/05/24/eu-takes-first-step-slippery-slope-internet-censorship/[/url] [/QUOTE] Do you have an article that offers more information about this new ruling? This article dedicates exactly two small paragraphs to it and they're very low on elaboration. [QUOTE]Besides, this is America we're talking about. Not Europe.[/QUOTE] Why would America be in danger from the 'dangerous precedent' of not giving a platform to neo-nazis who preach genocide? I don't necessarily disagree with you. I'm a pretty uncomfortable about the thought of censoring anyone myself. I'm trying to understand your angle better.

[QUOTE=Bertie;52689843]Why would America be in danger from the 'dangerous precedent' of not giving a platform to neo-nazis who preach genocide?[/QUOTE] Because that's how the US legal system works. If a court case against neo-nazis went to the supreme court and California vs Blahblah goes in the favor of censorship, it could be a landmark decision that would make it easier to disenfranchise other groups considered undesirable.

can we actually try to solve the problem with white nationalists and neo-nazis rather than silence them? i don't feel like silencing nazis will fix anything, i think they will simply spread through avenues of communication that are hard to monitor what is not with a voice is still with all its power, it's desire to speak will grow stronger and stronger

[QUOTE=Bertie;52689808]Tell me about the dangerous suppression of free speech in Europe.[/QUOTE] Just to hit the easy ones; Soviet Union and good ol' Nazi Germany.

[QUOTE=343N;52689885]can we actually try to solve the problem with white nationalists and neo-nazis rather than silence them? i don't feel like silencing nazis will fix anything, i think they will simply spread through avenues of communication that are hard to monitor what is not with a voice is still with all its power, it's desire to speak will grow stronger and stronger[/QUOTE] Clearly letting them speak so they can be "debated" hasn't helped, as they're just getting braver and braver every passing week. People are fucking stupid, and refuse to actually educate themselves on a myriad of topics, including things like racial "superiority". So if they've been primed with the right opinions and exposed to white nationalist beliefs ("muslims raping euvropa!!!! we being replaced!!!!!") but don't actually do the research into those topics, they'll likely sympathise with neo-nazis quite easily. And that's not even getting into the shitshow that is actually trying to "debate" a Nazi. For a point to be reasonably debated it should have some logical grounding in the first place. "Whites are objectively the best" and "we should kill the kikes" are not logical. "We're being overrun by muslims!!!" is also not a logical point as statistically it can be disproved. On top of this, the argumentative patterns of most neo-nazis is fucking garbage to actually argue against. Appeals to emotion, appeals to "authority" without sourcing said authority, blatant twisting of facts or omission of critical information to bolster their points, redirection, deflections, whataboutisms. It's nigh impossible to have a reasonable debate with such people.

[QUOTE=Cyke Lon bee;52689908]Just to hit the easy ones; Soviet Union and good ol' Nazi Germany.[/QUOTE] Neither of which even exist anymore, and thus aren't exactly valid examples of Europe's modern anti hate speech laws.

[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;52690110]Neither of which even exist anymore, and thus aren't exactly valid examples of Europe's modern anti hate speech laws.[/QUOTE] Sure, but the Soviet Union existed for most of the 20th century, and you could argue that modern day Russia is still heavy with censorship, what with the constant murder of reporters and censoring the names of soldiers who died fighting in the Crimea. If you'd allow me to move out of Europe in looking for examples, China and North Korea are another good pair. Theres not really any shortage of restricted speech laws being used to oppress people. Its not as bad as it used to be, sure, but why put the assets in place when they can be used by a more nefarious group down the line?

[QUOTE=Cyke Lon bee;52690239]Sure, but the Soviet Union existed for most of the 20th century, and you could argue that modern day Russia is still heavy with censorship, what with the constant murder of reporters and censoring the names of soldiers who died fighting in the Crimea. If you'd allow me to move out of Europe in looking for examples, China and North Korea are another good pair. Theres not really any shortage of restricted speech laws being used to oppress people. Its not as bad as it used to be, sure, but why put the assets in place when they can be used by a more nefarious group down the line?[/QUOTE] Continue naming places that are or until very recently were authoritarian shitholes, those are good comparisons to a working (if struggling) Western democracy. Do you think America will descend into North Korean cult-of-personality dictatorship if racists get their freedom of speech rights trampled on? Canada, just to your north, has laws on hate speech that do not have the same liberal free speech exceptions as you. Why don't you compare America to us? Why are you reaching for [I]Russia, China, and North Korea[/I]?

[QUOTE=Cyke Lon bee;52690239]Sure, but the Soviet Union existed for most of the 20th century, and you could argue that modern day Russia is still heavy with censorship, what with the constant murder of reporters and censoring the names of soldiers who died fighting in the Crimea. If you'd allow me to move out of Europe in looking for examples, China and North Korea are another good pair. Theres not really any shortage of restricted speech laws being used to oppress people. Its not as bad as it used to be, sure, but why put the assets in place when they can be used by a more nefarious group down the line?[/QUOTE] Do you believe that the [I]only notable difference[/I] between the United States and China, North Korea, and Russia is the lack of anti hate speech laws? Do you believe that every other Western country that DOES have anti hate speech laws is essentially interchangeable with China, North Korea, and Russia?

[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;52690544]Do you believe that the [I]only notable difference[/I] between the United States and China, North Korea, and Russia is the lack of anti hate speech laws? Do you believe that every other Western country that DOES have anti hate speech laws is essentially interchangeable with China, North Korea, and Russia?[/QUOTE] The differences between the West and the rest of the world are eroding with globalization, we already know this economically but it is also true politically. It's also true the Anglosphere is becoming more and more like the European continent as it loses its famous middle class, we politically polarize, and honest-to-god fascists and communists have their little street battles. We will never be like the historically despotic powers of the East or like a banana republic, but we are indeed losing our (classical) liberal character. The 20th century oversaw the unprecedented increase in and centralization of state power, especially in the latter half of it, the consolidation of businesses into a few giants that are in bed with the state, the development of mass media and of course the internet, superstates & unions, and so on. This means that today there are far less barriers to overreach, and I'd argue there is a tendency towards it as it becomes systemically necessary to deal with ostensibly globalization-related unrest and polarization arising from heightening inequality, loss of faith in democracy, and so on. History is full of states responding to political turbulence, but never have we had states and elites like we do today, and our historical-economic pace has never been so fast and total in scope. Consider the fact 150 years ago Europe was divided between a bunch of localized small to medium sized states each with their own customs and barriers to the movement of goods, and today we have a detached superstate with a common market and a questionable democratic character. 150 years ago we had a bunch of small property owners and artisans, today we have absolutely gigantic corporations that transcend the national scale and employ people in x country to produce stuff sold way over in y, as well as a shrinking middle class and inversely growing class divide. Then consider the fact that for most of human history people lived more or less the same across generations.

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;52690261]Continue naming places that are or until very recently were authoritarian shitholes, those are good comparisons to a working (if struggling) Western democracy. Do you think America will descend into North Korean cult-of-personality dictatorship if racists get their freedom of speech rights trampled on? Canada, just to your north, has laws on hate speech that do not have the same liberal free speech exceptions as you. Why don't you compare America to us? Why are you reaching for [I]Russia, China, and North Korea[/I]?[/QUOTE] I compared those because the original post I was quoting asked for examples of speech suppression being used in Europe to a dangerous effect, not tame ones. No of course America won't rapidly descend into an authoritarian dictatorship if we enact speech restrictions on a very specific group of people, no where did I imply that. Sure speech restriction laws have worked well for Canada, I cant or wont deny that, but the point I keep reiterating is that I would prefer those laws not be in place in my country because it makes it vastly easier to oppress people down the line. If the price we have to pay is a hilariously small minority being vastly wrong while being vastly hateful, I'm comfortable with it. The current speech protections we have are just fine. [editline]17th September 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Big Dumb American;52690544]Do you believe that the [I]only notable difference[/I] between the United States and China, North Korea, and Russia is the lack of anti hate speech laws? Do you believe that every other Western country that DOES have anti hate speech laws is essentially interchangeable with China, North Korea, and Russia?[/QUOTE] Not anywhere in my post did I imply any of what you mentioned.

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;52690261]Continue naming places that are or until very recently were authoritarian shitholes, those are good comparisons to a working (if struggling) Western democracy. Do you think America will descend into North Korean cult-of-personality dictatorship if racists get their freedom of speech rights trampled on? Canada, just to your north, has laws on hate speech that do not have the same liberal free speech exceptions as you. Why don't you compare America to us? Why are you reaching for [I]Russia, China, and North Korea[/I]?[/QUOTE] Probably because the people in charge of your country are actually reasonable to some degree. Have you seen how shit the administrations of the last two decades have been here? Shit I mean just look at who we have in charge right now and tell me they wouldn't abuse the fuck out of any laws which limit what people are allowed to say.

The Nazi's very EXISTENCE is a direct threat to the rights and liberties of others. Their methods are violent, their endgame is invariably genocide, their entire reason for existing is to destroy all those who are not them. Nazis are the enemy by definition. Craft your policies and legislature accordingly.