Racist memes spread after false claims that immigrants kill and eat pets.

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Okay, so you seem angry but I don't really know about what or what your point is. But my point is, if you can't even express yourself honestly, you have no freedom at all. You're just living under a tyranny that thinks it can decide what you are allowed to express. How can you support that?

@Argentbear talked about holding racists accountable. A lot of that comes down to personal interactions and decisions.

Racists are free to spout racist stuff (up to a certain point, even in your country), but they still have to deal with the consequences. If spouting racist crap ends up with the racist losing votes, a business transaction, a friendship, a job, etc., well... the people on the other side of those consequences have freedom, too.

 

[Wandering Monk]

Now the Hatians in Springfield are being harassed and vandalized. Trump's stooges are probably responsible.

Springfield city meeting sees protest, removal of Nazi group speaker

By Vicky Forrest

www.springfieldnewssun.com

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Sorry to say, governments in "the west" are becoming more authoritarian and so-called "hate speech" laws are a leading indicator of that.

Very well. Thanks for the clarification.

 

[Rival]

... in the same sense that it's "perfectly possible" that you are stealing and eating pets in your community.



If this is about religious practices, why not smear religious people in general instead of immigrants in general?

Wtf? How is it a smear? Did you read my posts? I'm not judging them. Some people engage in immoral actions through circumstance. Why do people read my posts as though I'm saying these people are vile? Where did I say that.

Also yes, yes, it's not only possible but actually happening. They do not necessarily eat pets here when they steal them but pet theft is day to day and I don't doubt some eat them. A few years ago there was a scandal with some immigrants illegally killing and eating swans. It happens.

 

[Brickjectivity]

I myself have attempted in this thread to assertain what the real facts are in the UK. I don't know what its actually like. I don't blame anyone for wanting to discuss what and American VP candidate says about migrants here. What I hear about migrants in the UK is scary.

BBC tries to shield people from thinking for themselves undermining its own intent to promote truth. Watching BBC is like being in church week after week. "Trust us." is its message. "We'll help you think." I think of BBC as NPR but scaled up and put in charge of most of our TV channels.

 

[Revoltingest]

There's a difference between criticizing Scientologists and their established history of abuse and hate speech that gets people hurt and killed.

Using the excuse that people would get hurt & killed
is a great bogus claim to make when political speech
is to be curbed. Consider Trump's dishonesty &
detachment from reality. If he becomes Pres again,
do you really believe that such power wouldn't be
horribly mis-used to prevent criticism of him, of
Christians, & of his judges. (Note that he's already
advocated making criticism of judges illegal.)
I'd rather risk lives (something you've not quantified)
than risk a fascist crackdown on political speech.

 

[Revoltingest]

But we are witnessing in the actions of Trump, Vance and Loomer et. al. something that is going beyond "criticism" and should not be confused with free speech any more than yelling fire in a theatre.

Yelling fire in a theatre is different.
Again, this boils down to how much we
trust the power to limit political speech.
I consider the range of leaders we've had.
Some of those shouldn't have that power.
I trust government less than you do.
I see the dangers of hate speech as less
than the dangers of government.

 

[Revoltingest]

And you always have the same lame excuses for not being up to speed on important topics, but weighing in anyway, sigh.

Actually, I know when you're spewing specious speculations as fact.
I ask for evidence only for your own edification.
But I observe that some people are just immune to learning.

 

[Revoltingest]

My point is that the existence of hate speech laws doesn't necessarily lead to their being abused or applied overly broadly. It is possible for a country to be highly free and still have them.

It is also possible that such laws would be mis-used.
Many countries criminalize speech that you & I
would consider valid. Perhaps you'd trust Biden
or Harris with such power. But what if Trump wins?
He's proposed making it illegal to criticize judges.

Revoltistanian saying about the fruits of limited government....
If you grant it power to do something for you,
you also grant it the power to do something to you.

 

[icehorse]

Actually, I know when you're spewing specious speculations as fact.
I ask for evidence only for your own edification.
But I observe that some people are just immune to learning.

project much?

 

[Revoltingest]

project much?

You really gotta work on your retorts.
They're declining faster than Trump's poll numbers.

 

[icehorse]

You really gotta work on your retorts.
They're declining faster than Trump's poll numbers.

i'm fine sticking with the truth

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Using the excuse that people would get hurt & killed
is a great bogus claim to make when political speech

No, it's not. Such as how it's very predictable this garbage over pets would lead to problems and violence.

Trump's dishonesty &
detachment from reality. If he becomes Pres again,
do you really believe that such power wouldn't be
horribly mis-used to prevent criticism of him, of
Christians, & of his judges. (Note that he's already
advocated making criticism of judges illegal.)
I'd rather risk lives (something you've not quantified)
than risk a fascist crackdown on political speech.

Trump can't be trusted with any power. You might as well make the case to strip the President of all powers.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Sorry to say, governments in "the west" are becoming more authoritarian and so-called "hate speech" laws are a leading indicator of that.

Even Ingsoc allows for and demands hate. However no one living under Ingsoc is free.

 

[icehorse]

Even Ingsoc allows for and demands hate.

I'm not sure how that connects, can you clarify?

 

[Revoltingest]

i'm fine sticking with the truth

Mistaking opinions for the truth again, eh.

 

[Revoltingest]

No, it's not. Such as how it's very predictable this garbage over pets would lead to problems and violence.

What did you predict?
What actually happened?

Trump can't be trusted with any power. You might as well make the case to strip the President of all powers.

It needn't be one extreme or the other.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I'm not sure how that connects, can you clarify?

It connects well to those who actually know certain terms that RWers consistently misuse.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

What did you predict?
What actually happened?

We're seeing harassment, vandalism amd more "concerned citizens." At least a few of us have been pointing out where this stuff leads to.

It needn't be one extreme or the other.

It's that you often use "can you trust politician x, party y to make these laws?" And asking in regards to Trump is not the best example as he highlighted many issues and shortcomings (that haven't been addressed) and proved he is so untrustable with power that it's even become absolutely necessary to decentralize the authority of a nuclear strike and remove it from the President's sole authority to decide one.
Also we need not reinvent the wheel. This is hard for America, as it's used to leading the way, but it's fallen behind and now simply need do nothing more than copy what others are doing.

 

[Revoltingest]

We're seeing harassment, vandalism amd more "concerned citizens." At least a few of us have been pointing out where this stuff leads to.

Sounds minimal.

It's that you often use "can you trust politician x, party y to make these laws?"

That's a poor & overly broad inference.

And asking in regards to Trump is not the best example as he highlighted many issues and shortcomings (that haven't been addressed) and proved he is so untrustable with power that it's even become absolutely necessary to decentralize the authority of a nuclear strike and remove it from the President's sole authority to decide one.

Trump is an ideal example to consider.
He's been President. He might be again.
You would give him too much power.

Also we need not reinvent the wheel.

We don't need to invent hate speech laws.
We have enuf trouble with government attempting
to make speech illegal already, eg, criminal offense
to insult a cop.

This is hard for America, as it's used to leading the way, but it's fallen behind and now simply need do nothing more than copy what others are doing.

I'd rather "fall behind" nations that imprison people
for insulting each other, their leaders, or religions.
Your own speech would put you in prison in many
other countries.