• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Incitement of Insurrection.

Kooky

Freedom from Sanity
I think it's a common standard in the case of any speech which incites violence or creates a clear and present danger.
Popular violence, at any rate.
Police, military and right-wing vigilantes are generally not held to that standard when they start beating people up or shooting at them.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
I recommend phrasing your statements more clearly and precisely.

But you are, of course, free to continue with vague insinuations while levying caustic sarcasm at people for having the gall to request further clarification.
You're a free man and I'm not the boss of you.
Oh, I respect gall.
But I want conversation, not merely providing fodder for bickering.
 
Last edited:

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Popular violence, at any rate.
Police, military and right-wing vigilantes are generally not held to that standard when they start beating people up or shooting at them.

They should be. But it's still difficult to prove the actual cause and effect, to say that someone's public statement directly led to an act of violence by someone else. There could be many other causes. Some suggest that the media are to blame, as they get people riled up with politically-driven rhetoric. Some right-wing media can be especially incendiary, but I've seen some left-wing stuff that's pretty bad, too.
 

Kooky

Freedom from Sanity
Oh, I respect gall.
But I want conversation, not merely providing fodder for bickering.
Neither do I, which is why I asked you to clarify your position before I go off on it.
But if you're not interested in a conversation after all, then that's fine by me. I've got plenty of other people to talk to.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Neither do I, which is why I asked you to clarify your position before I go off on it.
But if you're not interested in a conversation after all, then that's fine by me. I've got plenty of other people to talk to.
I did clarify.
 

Kooky

Freedom from Sanity
They should be. But it's still difficult to prove the actual cause and effect, to say that someone's public statement directly led to an act of violence by someone else. There could be many other causes. Some suggest that the media are to blame, as they get people riled up with politically-driven rhetoric. Some right-wing media can be especially incendiary, but I've seen some left-wing stuff that's pretty bad, too.
I would argue that in the case of state violence, it is utterly trivial to prove such causality. The issue here is that state violence against civilians - especially against leftists and ethnic minorities - is frequently seen as intrinsically legitimate by mainstream society.

I've never actually experienced left wing media in the West whipping people into violence.
It is one of these phenomena that I know must exist, in theory, but have yet to see for myself.
 
Top