Opinions relate to and are formulated by the history of the poster in question. So does their identity. 2016 was literally won by white nationalist identity politics. That is a buzz word created to ignore race issues.Why can't you desire both? I can desire for both but can't demand it.
I don't bring my race into this because I don't believe one's opinion is to be granted more or less merit predicated upon their skin color (or any other criteria). That's racism and identity politics. Everyone's opinion is worth as much as the arguments they present backing it up.
They actually tried to appease the Nazis through talking and giving them benefit of the doubt. It didn't work out so well.
I don't think you should use the organization that defended the KKK, Neo-Nazis, gun rights, NAMBLA, and the Westboro Baptist Church as some kind of shield. They have zero interest in the ramification of speech, they are strict constitutionalists who stan for a totally broken system no matter the cost.You're twisting my words if you think I mean actual physical actions don't deserve physical retaliation. I'm intimately familiar with WW2 and its lead up from both stories from my grandfather and research, so you don't need to be condescending over this. I have a different view on speech that aligns with the ACLU, that's all. We disagree on a fundamental level and so there's really nothing more for me to say.
"So-called Hate speech" they say about Nazis and the KKK. The ACLU is garbage. Take a look at that last part though, they agree that harmful speech can be punished. People have the right to say what they want, they also have a right to take a soda bath.The ACLU has often been at the center of controversy for defending the free speech rights of groups that spew hate, such as the Ku Klux Klan and the Nazis. But if only popular ideas were protected, we wouldn't need a First Amendment. History teaches that the first target of government repression is never the last. If we do not come to the defense of the free speech rights of the most unpopular among us, even if their views are antithetical to the very freedom the First Amendment stands for, then no one's liberty will be secure. In that sense, all First Amendment rights are "indivisible."
Censoring so-called hate speech also runs counter to the long-term interests of the most frequent victims of hate: racial, ethnic, religious and sexual minorities. We should not give the government the power to decide which opinions are hateful, for history has taught us that government is more apt to use this power to prosecute minorities than to protect them. As one federal judge has put it, tolerating hateful speech is "the best protection we have against any Nazi-type regime in this country."
At the same time, freedom of speech does not prevent punishing conduct that intimidates, harasses, or threatens another person, even if words are used. Threatening phone calls, for example, are not constitutionally protected.
Not a racist. He's just a confused sailor.
Transcript (from what I can hear):
This is what MAGA and Trump have emboldened. These fucks think they can do this and get away scott free. Sadly sometimes they do.They actually tried to appease the Nazis through talking and giving them benefit of the doubt. It didn't work out so well.
Also in response to the lynching pictures,
![]()
Back to stan some more for the shitheel with the MAGA cap.I know the OP posted a video that showed a small part of the incident but thought people would find the full, unedited clip interesting for those who haven't seen it. The man (30 year old Jimenez Kino) has been arrested.
Transcript (from what I can hear):
Jimenez: You ain't supporting the President.
You ain't supporting shit ni**a.
Bitch ass motherfucker.
Hunter: Ok...
Jimenez: This is going to go great in my fucking fireplace bitch.
Hunter: Alright, have fun with it.
Yeah that's prob been cut down, kid probably started filming way earlier and even if he didn't... maybe don't wear the hat next time hahaI know the OP posted a video that showed a small part of the incident but thought people would find the full, unedited clip interesting for those who haven't seen it. The man (30 year old Jimenez Kino) has been arrested.
Transcript (from what I can hear):
Jimenez: You ain't supporting the President.
You ain't supporting shit ni**a.
Bitch ass motherfucker.
Hunter: Ok...
Jimenez: This is going to go great in my fucking fireplace bitch.
Hunter: Alright, have fun with it.
This doesn't show what lead up to the incident. I think it is literally the same length of time or close to it? Though I appreciate an update regarding the speech being uncensored.I know the OP posted a video that showed a small part of the incident but thought people would find the full, unedited clip interesting for those who haven't seen it. The man (30 year old Jimenez Kino) has been arrested.
Transcript (from what I can hear):
Jimenez: You ain't supporting the President.
You ain't supporting shit ni**a.
Bitch ass motherfucker.
Hunter: Ok...
Jimenez: This is going to go great in my fucking fireplace bitch.
Hunter: Alright, have fun with it.
That’s what pissed me off. The hat is basically the symbol of hate and racism towards all minorities to me now.This is what MAGA and Trump have emboldened. These fucks think they can do this and get away scott free. Sadly sometimes they do.
I’ve been pounding this all night in the thread. MAGA is absolutely positively a symbol of hate.That’s what pissed me off. The hat is basically the symbol of hate and racism towards all minorities to me now.
I can't share your optimism. I hope but doubt much will change even with a big win for the Dems. And if they don't win big in the coming months oh man.Drops dripping from the crest of a blue wave, yes. Isn't it refreshing?
Probably triple down knowing how the internet works.Eh....at one point my dad had a maga hat in his office, i threw it out, because i would end up in jail if someone laid hands on him or threw a drink in his face. I had to tell him that, let that sink in. He needed to know the hat didn’t mean what he thought it meant. Or what it has been associated with since Trunp became president. I hope dude in the video confronts people his own size. Idk if that incident will scare that kid (and his friends) straight or drive him to triple down with some Twitter hate group.
Not racist...They actually tried to appease the Nazis through talking and giving them benefit of the doubt. It didn't work out so well.
Also in response to the lynching pictures,
![]()
An opinion shouldn't be legitimized over another's by the experiences or history of the person but by the utilization of logic, facts, and argumentation by which it is substantiated. Otherwise two people, one black, the other white, making the exact same argument are not on equal grounds by virtue of their identity. That's bullshit.Opinions relate to and are formulated by the history of the poster in question. So does their identity. 2016 was literally won by white nationalist identity politics. That is a buzz word created to ignore race issues.
I desire free speech and no more violence. I know this is not possible, so I understand the need to end assembly of hate groups NOW. No more hate groups, no more hate symbols, no more violence. You cannot have these things coexist in practical reality, so aim for what is just.
This doesn't show what lead up to the incident. I think it is literally the same length of time or close to it? Though I appreciate an update regarding the speech being uncensored.
Back to stan some more for the shitheel with the MAGA cap.
Funny how all your posts in here have been like this. Almost like you might have an agenda...
Very true, either the kid's lying or the witness is lying. Sorry, no agenda here, not really standing for anyone. If the kid's lying about the events leading up then I can somewhat understand (although still not support) why Jimenez was driven to such a reaction but if it truly was an unprovoked attack then I think this is an all around bad look for Jimenez.Yeah that's prob been cut down, kid probably started filming way earlier and even if he didn't... maybe don't wear the hat next time haha
"I grew up in a place where I was a minority."I find it odd that as a minority that you are comfortable with their assembly, and that you're just bringing up that fact now.
How about you start and stop at nazis? You know, the group whose entire ideology consists of ethnic cleansing? And that has actually put that ideology in practice, leading to the death of millions of people already.Since you believe free (hate) speech and no more violence isn't possible, where do you draw the line if you end freedom of assembly for certain things but not for others? Once you begin where do you stop? It's a slippery slope.
Goddamnit this is like the 5th time Bad Religion has beaten me to a joke.
Man, I’m glad I’m not the only one who saw through that bullshit line."I grew up in a place where I was a minority."
Pay close attention to how this is worded. I have seen this specific wording when it is a white person who grew up in a neighborhood that was predominately non-white but the rest of the country is.
So you're saying that hate speech is actually violence. You have been called all these things and been treated like crap psychologically. Psychological scarring from crap like that can literally take years of your life.Yes, that's what we're disagreeing on. Hate speech is certainly something, but violence it is not imo and thus does not deserve physical retaliation until it becomes a self-defense scenario. It's the difference between someone saying to me "all Jews should die" and "I'm going to kill you because you're a Jew". I have experienced the former and have done nothing physical in response, but the latter is where I'd gauge my options with physical retaliation being one of them because it could be a self-defense issue.
I think there are things to be said about incitement when you have a massive platform, but I would label that something else. Either way, I'm still disagreeing with the underlying narrative that an appropriate response to a 16 year old being a racist prick with his buddy at a fast food place is physical retaliation.
An opinion shouldn't be legitimized over another's by the experiences or history of the person but by the utilization of logic, facts, and argumentation by which it is substantiated. Otherwise two people, one black, the other white, making the exact same argument are not on equal grounds by virtue of their identity. That's bullshit.
Since you believe free (hate) speech and no more violence isn't possible, where do you draw the line if you end freedom of assembly for certain things but not for others? Once you begin where do you stop? It's a slippery slope.
Exactly.That’s what pissed me off. The hat is basically the symbol of hate and racism towards all minorities to me now.
No, they don't.The man is a hero. Fuck the SAPD for arresting him. Don't they have better things to then to arrest innocent people?
I’ve been pounding this all night in the thread. MAGA is absolutely positively a symbol of hate.
It’s not some cutesy oh I just like the president thing. It has a meaning, and it ain’t good
This is way off topic, but though I know pride month is over, I really miss your rainbow skellie hahaLogic, facts, and argumentation are influenced by the identity of a person. I am not going to believe a male feminist over a female feminist who have equal professional and educational backgrounds. I'd be taking away the life experience of the female for the male, when the female has actually lived their experience. Living something lends it legitmacy, otherwise you'd be arguing that the black caucus should be white.
I end the freedom for assembly of things based on groups such as the Southern Poverty Law Center's identification, an expert on hate groups. It's honestly pretty easy to tell who is and isn't an extremist hate group at this point. "Jews will not replace us?". "Blood and soil?" Tiki torches en masse? You should not assemble, batter, and kill people. Identify iconography, phrases, etc, and don't allow them to exist.
Despite going Native for the 4th of July, then back to normal, the rainbow skeleton is back for you baby! I actually liked it quite a bit too, lol. I'll at least keep it till the end of July.This is way off topic, but though I know pride month is over, I really miss your rainbow skellie haha
As for the actual topic, good. Screw Trumpers and screw civility at this point. These sons of bitches are literally tearing this country down around us every second they stay in power.
Some people aren't content to just be devoured by the beast without trying to bite back. Good for them.
Logic and facts are influenced by nothing, they simply are. Argumentation I'd posit is determined by the ability to utilize the former to effective means, partly through nature and partly through nurture (meaning education, but not necessarily through one's personal experiences and identity). The problem with taking someone's identity into account is that it's not viewing their position on what it is but from who it is. That allows bias and prejudice to skew and disregard and throw out logic, facts, and argumentation in favor of subjectivity. If you do that, there's no end to shifting the goal posts. Arguments cannot be won.Logic, facts, and argumentation are influenced by the identity of a person. I am not going to believe a male feminist over a female feminist who have equal professional and educational backgrounds. I'd be taking away the life experience of the female for the male, when the female has actually lived their experience. Living something lends it legitmacy, otherwise you'd be arguing that the black caucus should be white.
I end the freedom for assembly of things based on groups such as the Southern Poverty Law Center's identification, an expert on hate groups. It's honestly pretty easy to tell who is and isn't an extremist hate group at this point. "Jews will not replace us?". "Blood and soil?" Tiki torches en masse? You should not assemble, batter, and kill people. Identify iconography, phrases, etc, and don't allow them to exist.
Absolutely disgusting. I can’t believe people here advocate and encourage violence against others because of their political views. It shows how much screwed up you are.I am positively in love with this new trend of openly treating these people like shit in public.
In a perfectly sterilized environment such as a laboratory examining something, then yes. However, we are dealing with human sciences here. Every publication, every viewpoint, etc, is based on the writer and their publication as well as their history and culture. Would you really trust the opinion regarding a hate symbol's legitimacy of a young white male American's over a living holocaust survivor's?
LGBTQ+ organizations are not viewed as a hate group and would need such assertion by a well organized group to get to disassembly. If we stood up and argued against hate speech as a whole they would not end up in the dystopia you are describing.You want to disallow assembly propagating morally repugnant ideas, but what about my example of LGBT? Because rest assured, there are people out there, very powerful institutions in fact, who view homosexuality as morally repugnant. Many of these people believe and argue that promoting this lifestyle can be psychologically damaging. Sure, I understand this isn't anything like shoving people into ovens by the millions, I'm not making such a comparison, just to show in principle it's the same idea: who's to determine on what basis is something morally acceptable to allow assembly?
Lol, you’re only mad cause the roles are reversed for once.Absolutely disgusting. I can’t believe people here advocate and encourage violence against others because of their political views. It shows how much screwed up you are.
Here's a fresh take that i hadn't considered.Absolutely disgusting. I can’t believe people here advocate and encourage violence against others because of their political views. It shows how much screwed up you are.
Either you allow it all and take means to mitigate the consequences of the worst, or you allow none and sacrifice the allowance of the most beneficial. I don't see how people holding different standards of morality can be compatible with freedom of expression and assembly if you say "X is allowable but Y isn't".
How about you start and stop at nazis? You know, the group whose entire ideology consists of ethnic cleansing? And that has actually put that ideology in practice, leading to the death of millions of people already.
This argument doesn't hold any water because speech has always held restrictions, even in the U.S. You can't directly threaten to kill someone, certain acts of defamation are illegal, you can't incite panic by yelling fire etc. The fact that certain countries have gone a step further and chosen to outlaw harmful speech that targets specific groups does not somehow make them any more oppressive.Either you allow it all and take means to mitigate the consequences of the worst, or you allow none and sacrifice the allowance of the most beneficial. I don't see how people holding different standards of morality can be compatible with freedom of expression and assembly if you say "X is allowable but Y isn't".
Maybe you'll understand it now.
What rolls? I don’t advocate violence against people. It’s absolutely disgusting how you and other advocate violence against others.
Narrator: They won’t.
I presume you hold the same rigid view when talking about ISIS supporters right?What rolls? I don’t advocate violence against people. It’s absolutely disgusting how you and other advocate violence against others.