Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ KingBash said:
@ pumpf said:
I'm guessing that everyone here who is FOR free speech is completely OK with giving people the opportunity to speak- even if they disagree with them? How about the right to not speak- when doing so would advocate for something that a person's conscience won't allow them to support? I'm guessing those folks who are clutching their pearls in this thread would also be against that, right?
I would agree with the liberals here- if they weren't such damn hypocrites. Let's face it, they are not concerned with free speech. They are concerned with making sure that THEIR ability to speak is protected; they could give a damn about protecting the speech of those with whom they disagree. And, by the way, what liberals are doing now isn't "protesting"; it is THREATENING others who disagree with them. Or they are shutting down highways, airports, etc. It's been a LONG time since I found a liberal who was truly willing to support the free speech of someone with whom they disagreed. Meanwhile they will advocate for the silencing of anyone who doesn't spew liberal viewpoints; including calling for them to be fired, harassed or even harmed. But all of that is OK; because those people won't go to jail for their viewpoints... they'll just lose their job, reputations and possibly their good health. But the "government" won't be the one to take away their right to free, though, so it's OK... except for any Christian who doesn't want to be forced to endorse something they disagree with. Then it's OK for the government to fine/jail a person. Oh, and let's not forget about Obama's IRS going after conservatives... or journalists for that matter. When he went after a person's civil liberties, it was OK... 'cause, you know, HE was cool... and he hated the same things that other liberals hated.
The utter lack of self-awareness is sad... and no longer shocking. While some rail against the spectre of Trump limiting "free speech", many liberals cheered Obama (and various state governments) for their actual attacks on free speech. And even though it's not a "first amendment" issue, they ALSO cheer when various businesses do the same thing. So forgive me if I don't take their consternation seriously. As soon as they are willing to protect ALL speech... I'll be perfectly happy to stand with them in defending the first amendment (which, ironically, includes the freedom of religion- the right to practice my religion and put my faith into practice without government opposition). Let me know when you guys are actually interested in that and I'll be right there with you.
I'm 100% for "the right" to be able to go to college campuses and speak. I think what they say is inflammatory, false, and oftentimes dangerous, but I don't like how young millenials will go and shout them down, use airhorns, sign petitions to keep them away, etc. Not all of us "liberals" support that shit. The solution to alt-right silliness (Anne Coulter, Richard Spencer, Steve Bannon) is to let them speak, expose their ideas, and counter those.
ALL speech should be protected.
This has been my default approach. But it's not working. Damned if there aren't a gazillion good folks eager to buy in to the hate and ignorance. There's a far right-wing, openly racist, misogynistic and anti-gay candidate--just a real scumbag--poised to win the presidential election in Brazil right now. He's being called the Trump of the Tropics and he's following Very Stable Genius' game plan. Hate now has a foothold in the world again. I'm not a fan of the shouting down, but I also know that the only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.
whats funny is that is exactly what motivates the people that are of the opposing view points as well....
IMO its all the action with little tolerance or attempting to see a position from anothers point of view is what is leading to all this evil.
No doubt. I have no doubt that Nazis and other right wingers think of us as intolerant of their point of view. I'm OK with that.
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ KingBash said:
@ pumpf said:
I'm guessing that everyone here who is FOR free speech is completely OK with giving people the opportunity to speak- even if they disagree with them? How about the right to not speak- when doing so would advocate for something that a person's conscience won't allow them to support? I'm guessing those folks who are clutching their pearls in this thread would also be against that, right?
I would agree with the liberals here- if they weren't such damn hypocrites. Let's face it, they are not concerned with free speech. They are concerned with making sure that THEIR ability to speak is protected; they could give a damn about protecting the speech of those with whom they disagree. And, by the way, what liberals are doing now isn't "protesting"; it is THREATENING others who disagree with them. Or they are shutting down highways, airports, etc. It's been a LONG time since I found a liberal who was truly willing to support the free speech of someone with whom they disagreed. Meanwhile they will advocate for the silencing of anyone who doesn't spew liberal viewpoints; including calling for them to be fired, harassed or even harmed. But all of that is OK; because those people won't go to jail for their viewpoints... they'll just lose their job, reputations and possibly their good health. But the "government" won't be the one to take away their right to free, though, so it's OK... except for any Christian who doesn't want to be forced to endorse something they disagree with. Then it's OK for the government to fine/jail a person. Oh, and let's not forget about Obama's IRS going after conservatives... or journalists for that matter. When he went after a person's civil liberties, it was OK... 'cause, you know, HE was cool... and he hated the same things that other liberals hated.
The utter lack of self-awareness is sad... and no longer shocking. While some rail against the spectre of Trump limiting "free speech", many liberals cheered Obama (and various state governments) for their actual attacks on free speech. And even though it's not a "first amendment" issue, they ALSO cheer when various businesses do the same thing. So forgive me if I don't take their consternation seriously. As soon as they are willing to protect ALL speech... I'll be perfectly happy to stand with them in defending the first amendment (which, ironically, includes the freedom of religion- the right to practice my religion and put my faith into practice without government opposition). Let me know when you guys are actually interested in that and I'll be right there with you.
I'm 100% for "the right" to be able to go to college campuses and speak. I think what they say is inflammatory, false, and oftentimes dangerous, but I don't like how young millenials will go and shout them down, use airhorns, sign petitions to keep them away, etc. Not all of us "liberals" support that shit. The solution to alt-right silliness (Anne Coulter, Richard Spencer, Steve Bannon) is to let them speak, expose their ideas, and counter those.
ALL speech should be protected.
This has been my default approach. But it's not working. Damned if there aren't a gazillion good folks eager to buy in to the hate and ignorance. There's a far right-wing, openly racist, misogynistic and anti-gay candidate--just a real scumbag--poised to win the presidential election in Brazil right now. He's being called the Trump of the Tropics and he's following Very Stable Genius' game plan. Hate now has a foothold in the world again. I'm not a fan of the shouting down, but I also know that the only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.
whats funny is that is exactly what motivates the people that are of the opposing view points as well....
IMO its all the action with little tolerance or attempting to see a position from anothers point of view is what is leading to all this evil.
No doubt. I have no doubt that Nazis and other right wingers think of us as intolerant of their point of view. I'm OK with that.
Yep, I am sure you are righteous and they aND those that disagree with your positions are all evil. There can't be any other answer.
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ KingBash said:
@ pumpf said:
I'm guessing that everyone here who is FOR free speech is completely OK with giving people the opportunity to speak- even if they disagree with them? How about the right to not speak- when doing so would advocate for something that a person's conscience won't allow them to support? I'm guessing those folks who are clutching their pearls in this thread would also be against that, right?
I would agree with the liberals here- if they weren't such damn hypocrites. Let's face it, they are not concerned with free speech. They are concerned with making sure that THEIR ability to speak is protected; they could give a damn about protecting the speech of those with whom they disagree. And, by the way, what liberals are doing now isn't "protesting"; it is THREATENING others who disagree with them. Or they are shutting down highways, airports, etc. It's been a LONG time since I found a liberal who was truly willing to support the free speech of someone with whom they disagreed. Meanwhile they will advocate for the silencing of anyone who doesn't spew liberal viewpoints; including calling for them to be fired, harassed or even harmed. But all of that is OK; because those people won't go to jail for their viewpoints... they'll just lose their job, reputations and possibly their good health. But the "government" won't be the one to take away their right to free, though, so it's OK... except for any Christian who doesn't want to be forced to endorse something they disagree with. Then it's OK for the government to fine/jail a person. Oh, and let's not forget about Obama's IRS going after conservatives... or journalists for that matter. When he went after a person's civil liberties, it was OK... 'cause, you know, HE was cool... and he hated the same things that other liberals hated.
The utter lack of self-awareness is sad... and no longer shocking. While some rail against the spectre of Trump limiting "free speech", many liberals cheered Obama (and various state governments) for their actual attacks on free speech. And even though it's not a "first amendment" issue, they ALSO cheer when various businesses do the same thing. So forgive me if I don't take their consternation seriously. As soon as they are willing to protect ALL speech... I'll be perfectly happy to stand with them in defending the first amendment (which, ironically, includes the freedom of religion- the right to practice my religion and put my faith into practice without government opposition). Let me know when you guys are actually interested in that and I'll be right there with you.
I'm 100% for "the right" to be able to go to college campuses and speak. I think what they say is inflammatory, false, and oftentimes dangerous, but I don't like how young millenials will go and shout them down, use airhorns, sign petitions to keep them away, etc. Not all of us "liberals" support that shit. The solution to alt-right silliness (Anne Coulter, Richard Spencer, Steve Bannon) is to let them speak, expose their ideas, and counter those.
ALL speech should be protected.
This has been my default approach. But it's not working. Damned if there aren't a gazillion good folks eager to buy in to the hate and ignorance. There's a far right-wing, openly racist, misogynistic and anti-gay candidate--just a real scumbag--poised to win the presidential election in Brazil right now. He's being called the Trump of the Tropics and he's following Very Stable Genius' game plan. Hate now has a foothold in the world again. I'm not a fan of the shouting down, but I also know that the only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.
whats funny is that is exactly what motivates the people that are of the opposing view points as well....
IMO its all the action with little tolerance or attempting to see a position from anothers point of view is what is leading to all this evil.
No doubt. I have no doubt that Nazis and other right wingers think of us as intolerant of their point of view. I'm OK with that.
Yep, I am sure you are righteous and they aND those that disagree with your positions are all evil. There can't be any other answer.
Nope. Not all who disagree with me are evil. But Nazis are. And I'm OK being accused of "righteous" among them.
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
Nope. Not all who disagree with me are evil. But Nazis are. And I'm OK being accused of "righteous" among them.
So... the substance of your argument is that people who view the world differently that you are Nazis?
Quote: @pumpf said:
@ MaroonBells said:
Nope. Not all who disagree with me are evil. But Nazis are. And I'm OK being accused of "righteous" among them.
So... the substance of your argument is that people who view the world differently that you are Nazis?
Um...you know we're talking about actual Nazis here, right? The right wing movements I'm talking about in Brazil, Sweden, and Germany have been supported in large part by the massive growth of fascism and nazism there.
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
Um...you know we're talking about actual Nazis here, right? The right wing movements I'm talking about in Brazil, Sweden, and Germany have been supported in large part by the massive growth of fascism and nazism there.
In my mind, which knows only a little about their situations, the right wing movements in all 3 of those countries (and the US) are caused more by the lefts failing in their countries and it's resulting backlash, rather than a grassroots rise of fascism or nazism.
In Brazil, they are coming off 3 liberal presidencies, 2 of which have been impeached and removed for corruption and the current president who has an approval rating in the single digits who has also been impeached and charged with corruption. I think it would be very natural to see a backlash away from that and towards anything else that resembles a moral high ground or is against the corrupt left.
Sweden and Germany have both been very open to accepting refugees and I think there is a backlash both towards being able to financially afford them and the fear that so much multiculturalism so fast will erode their own culture. That backlash against the lefts policies inevitably leads to a shift to the right.
Quote: @medaille said:
@ MaroonBells said:
Um...you know we're talking about actual Nazis here, right? The right wing movements I'm talking about in Brazil, Sweden, and Germany have been supported in large part by the massive growth of fascism and nazism there.
Sweden and Germany have both been very open to accepting refugees and I think there is a backlash both towards being able to financially afford them and the fear that so much multiculturalism so fast will erode their own culture. That backlash against the lefts policies inevitably leads to a shift to the right.
Yep. Same thing is happening in Italy: these smaller towns that refugees move to don't have the resources to handle it and their unemployment rate is at 11% overall, which is actually down from what it was a few months ago. Its causing exactly what you say, fear of eroding their culture and a sense of 'Italy isn't helping their own residents, how can we assist all of this influx of refugees?'.
There are a myriad of issues that massive influxes of refugees quickly into a small country can cause, so its not black and white.
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ KingBash said:
@ pumpf said:
I'm guessing that everyone here who is FOR free speech is completely OK with giving people the opportunity to speak- even if they disagree with them? How about the right to not speak- when doing so would advocate for something that a person's conscience won't allow them to support? I'm guessing those folks who are clutching their pearls in this thread would also be against that, right?
I would agree with the liberals here- if they weren't such damn hypocrites. Let's face it, they are not concerned with free speech. They are concerned with making sure that THEIR ability to speak is protected; they could give a damn about protecting the speech of those with whom they disagree. And, by the way, what liberals are doing now isn't "protesting"; it is THREATENING others who disagree with them. Or they are shutting down highways, airports, etc. It's been a LONG time since I found a liberal who was truly willing to support the free speech of someone with whom they disagreed. Meanwhile they will advocate for the silencing of anyone who doesn't spew liberal viewpoints; including calling for them to be fired, harassed or even harmed. But all of that is OK; because those people won't go to jail for their viewpoints... they'll just lose their job, reputations and possibly their good health. But the "government" won't be the one to take away their right to free, though, so it's OK... except for any Christian who doesn't want to be forced to endorse something they disagree with. Then it's OK for the government to fine/jail a person. Oh, and let's not forget about Obama's IRS going after conservatives... or journalists for that matter. When he went after a person's civil liberties, it was OK... 'cause, you know, HE was cool... and he hated the same things that other liberals hated.
The utter lack of self-awareness is sad... and no longer shocking. While some rail against the spectre of Trump limiting "free speech", many liberals cheered Obama (and various state governments) for their actual attacks on free speech. And even though it's not a "first amendment" issue, they ALSO cheer when various businesses do the same thing. So forgive me if I don't take their consternation seriously. As soon as they are willing to protect ALL speech... I'll be perfectly happy to stand with them in defending the first amendment (which, ironically, includes the freedom of religion- the right to practice my religion and put my faith into practice without government opposition). Let me know when you guys are actually interested in that and I'll be right there with you.
I'm 100% for "the right" to be able to go to college campuses and speak. I think what they say is inflammatory, false, and oftentimes dangerous, but I don't like how young millenials will go and shout them down, use airhorns, sign petitions to keep them away, etc. Not all of us "liberals" support that shit. The solution to alt-right silliness (Anne Coulter, Richard Spencer, Steve Bannon) is to let them speak, expose their ideas, and counter those.
ALL speech should be protected.
This has been my default approach. But it's not working. Damned if there aren't a gazillion good folks eager to buy in to the hate and ignorance. There's a far right-wing, openly racist, misogynistic and anti-gay candidate--just a real scumbag--poised to win the presidential election in Brazil right now. He's being called the Trump of the Tropics and he's following Very Stable Genius' game plan. Hate now has a foothold in the world again. I'm not a fan of the shouting down, but I also know that the only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.
whats funny is that is exactly what motivates the people that are of the opposing view points as well....
IMO its all the action with little tolerance or attempting to see a position from anothers point of view is what is leading to all this evil.
No doubt. I have no doubt that Nazis and other right wingers think of us as intolerant of their point of view. I'm OK with that.
Yep, I am sure you are righteous and they aND those that disagree with your positions are all evil. There can't be any other answer.
Nazis and white supremacists are evil, yes. There can't be other answer.
Why do people insist on taking this stance? Fuck 'em! Nobody is excusing the behavior of antifa, but let's all agree as a benchmark starting place, fuck Nazis. Seems pretty reasonable to me!
Quote: @medaille said:
@ MaroonBells said:
Um...you know we're talking about actual Nazis here, right? The right wing movements I'm talking about in Brazil, Sweden, and Germany have been supported in large part by the massive growth of fascism and nazism there.
In my mind, which knows only a little about their situations, the right wing movements in all 3 of those countries (and the US) are caused more by the lefts failing in their countries and it's resulting backlash, rather than a grassroots rise of fascism or nazism.
In Brazil, they are coming off 3 liberal presidencies, 2 of which have been impeached and removed for corruption and the current president who has an approval rating in the single digits who has also been impeached and charged with corruption. I think it would be very natural to see a backlash away from that and towards anything else that resembles a moral high ground or is against the corrupt left.
Sweden and Germany have both been very open to accepting refugees and I think there is a backlash both towards being able to financially afford them and the fear that so much multiculturalism so fast will erode their own culture. That backlash against the lefts policies inevitably leads to a shift to the right.
There's truth in that. Just like the abolishment of slavery gave rise to the KKK. The Civil Rights movement gave it another big boost. I don't think you have the Tea Party or a nut like Trump in office if you don't first have Barack Obama. There is always going to be reactions and overreactions to every action.
Quote: @KingBash said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ KingBash said:
@ pumpf said:
I'm guessing that everyone here who is FOR free speech is completely OK with giving people the opportunity to speak- even if they disagree with them? How about the right to not speak- when doing so would advocate for something that a person's conscience won't allow them to support? I'm guessing those folks who are clutching their pearls in this thread would also be against that, right?
I would agree with the liberals here- if they weren't such damn hypocrites. Let's face it, they are not concerned with free speech. They are concerned with making sure that THEIR ability to speak is protected; they could give a damn about protecting the speech of those with whom they disagree. And, by the way, what liberals are doing now isn't "protesting"; it is THREATENING others who disagree with them. Or they are shutting down highways, airports, etc. It's been a LONG time since I found a liberal who was truly willing to support the free speech of someone with whom they disagreed. Meanwhile they will advocate for the silencing of anyone who doesn't spew liberal viewpoints; including calling for them to be fired, harassed or even harmed. But all of that is OK; because those people won't go to jail for their viewpoints... they'll just lose their job, reputations and possibly their good health. But the "government" won't be the one to take away their right to free, though, so it's OK... except for any Christian who doesn't want to be forced to endorse something they disagree with. Then it's OK for the government to fine/jail a person. Oh, and let's not forget about Obama's IRS going after conservatives... or journalists for that matter. When he went after a person's civil liberties, it was OK... 'cause, you know, HE was cool... and he hated the same things that other liberals hated.
The utter lack of self-awareness is sad... and no longer shocking. While some rail against the spectre of Trump limiting "free speech", many liberals cheered Obama (and various state governments) for their actual attacks on free speech. And even though it's not a "first amendment" issue, they ALSO cheer when various businesses do the same thing. So forgive me if I don't take their consternation seriously. As soon as they are willing to protect ALL speech... I'll be perfectly happy to stand with them in defending the first amendment (which, ironically, includes the freedom of religion- the right to practice my religion and put my faith into practice without government opposition). Let me know when you guys are actually interested in that and I'll be right there with you.
I'm 100% for "the right" to be able to go to college campuses and speak. I think what they say is inflammatory, false, and oftentimes dangerous, but I don't like how young millenials will go and shout them down, use airhorns, sign petitions to keep them away, etc. Not all of us "liberals" support that shit. The solution to alt-right silliness (Anne Coulter, Richard Spencer, Steve Bannon) is to let them speak, expose their ideas, and counter those.
ALL speech should be protected.
This has been my default approach. But it's not working. Damned if there aren't a gazillion good folks eager to buy in to the hate and ignorance. There's a far right-wing, openly racist, misogynistic and anti-gay candidate--just a real scumbag--poised to win the presidential election in Brazil right now. He's being called the Trump of the Tropics and he's following Very Stable Genius' game plan. Hate now has a foothold in the world again. I'm not a fan of the shouting down, but I also know that the only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.
whats funny is that is exactly what motivates the people that are of the opposing view points as well....
IMO its all the action with little tolerance or attempting to see a position from anothers point of view is what is leading to all this evil.
No doubt. I have no doubt that Nazis and other right wingers think of us as intolerant of their point of view. I'm OK with that.
Yep, I am sure you are righteous and they aND those that disagree with your positions are all evil. There can't be any other answer.
Nazis and white supremacists are evil, yes. There can't be other answer.
Why do people insist on taking this stance? Fuck 'em! Nobody is excusing the behavior of antifa, but let's all agree as a benchmark starting place, fuck Nazis. Seems pretty reasonable to me!
I don't excuse the behavior of Antifa, but it's important to remember that on one side you have people who hate and on the other, people who are opposed to that hate. Both are wrong in their methods, but if I were going to choose a side, it's not hard for me to decide which one. As a big fan of Jesus, Ghandi and MLK, I think the anti-racists and anti-fascists would be more effective if they chose a non-violent approach, but then people often ask why the Jews didn't fight back as they were herded to their deaths. What would it look like if they had?
|
