Freedom of Speech (did I miss something?)

[kandrathe]

Allowing free speech for white nationalists and Nazi types does NOT lead to free speech for all, but as material reality has proven ever so many times, rather LESS free speech and MORE violence. I've said it time and again - white nationalists should NOT have a platform for their views, because the consequences of doing so lead to more violence for everyone else. The poor woman who lost her life in Charlottesville to some nazi terrorist is but one in countless events that prove this fact.

What if we changed the complexion of the antagonist...

"Allowing free speech for Communists does NOT lead to free speech for all, but as material reality has proven ever so many times, rather LESS free speech and MORE violence. I've said it time and again - communists should NOT have a platform for their views, because the consequences of doing so lead to more violence for everyone else. "

Joe McCarthy anyone? Violence as we witnessed in Charlotsville is bad, wherever the source. What are white nationalists? Is that a red neck trucker wearing a MAGA hat? Nationalism or patriotism is a political position... like America first. The danger is just as we see happening in media now... If you are not on the progressive, socialist side... you are a hate filled Nazi sympathizer, or worse. This is exactly what happened in Germany in the early 30's. Hundreds of brown shirts clashed with an equal gaggle of revolutionary communists. Year over year, the people eventually chose to give power to the side that promised everything and end to the violence. They did, for awhile, they killed the communists with the power of the government.

As stated in the article, you can make the most logical, articulate, and cohesive argument ever written for the concept of absolute free speech being one of the foundations to a fair and just society, but it STILL does not pan out in the real world.

I will put my trust in the rule of law, and careful deliberation of ideas. I don't know if you perused the powers of the KKK act, but if a hate group is systematically terrorizing any of your list of threatened minorities they have ready means to seek justice. How do you qualify graduations of "free speech"? You either have it, or you do not. If I'm free to express the correct thoughts, but not free to express the wrong thoughts, then we have no freedom of speech. Like in many parts of Europe... Sanctioning speech doesn't stop the movements, it just stops the ability to rationally discuss them in public. It is tyranny.

Just because the human race hasn't gone extinct because of said hateful views doesn't make them any less deplorable or any more excusable; or that they should not be challenged and censored. Many people have and still do die and suffer in a multitude of ways because of these views and rotten ideas that we say they should be allowed to express, regardless of how shitty they are. I'm sorry, you will never get me on board with this, cause again, free speech absolutism is an idealistic fantasy grounded in libertopia. Allowing free speech for nazis or white nationalists is politically an untenable position both morally and pragmatically.

For me, it's more like my position on the death penalty. If you allow it to be a power of your government, you risk finding yourself the victim of it if the wind blows a different way. I don't want government choosing what are the good ideas or bad ideas... this is why it is the very first right, in the bill of rights. Who do you want to choose to be the arbiter of truth? Do you want to be able to choose for yourself, or have government punish the wrong thinkers?

I don't know about you, but I'm fully capable of discerning good ideas from garbage. The solution to Nazi's spouting off, is more speech describing how they are FOS. As you say, we all know the dreadful results the last time they rose to power. If you trust in your fellow citizens to be capable of cogent rational decision making, then we are all fine. They will climb back into their caves, and slither back under the rocks. We just need to remind them why we had welcomed their stupid pompousity last time they dusted off their hoods, and just ... tell the truth about them. Under the glare of truth, bad ideas die. But, violence only begets more violence until we have a much bigger problem. Ask the Sunni's...

If the majority is on your side and thinks we need daddy dictator to tell us what to think, I fear we are doomed.

[FireIceTalon]

And our Nazi-in-chief just pardoned the American gestapo Joe Arpaio, after he was found guilty of illegally racial profiling. So much for bourgeois rule-of-law. Just another example in a history of literally millions of examples of how the system will always favor the ruling class and its state henchman over regular working people. The quote in my sig, once again, rings true. Trump stated that he was found guilty of "doing his job", and indeed, Trump is (for once) actually right about something: it is the job of the American Gestapo to keep those unruly workers in line.

[kandrathe]

And our Nazi-in-chief just pardoned the American gestapo Joe Arpaio, after he was found guilty of illegally racial profiling. So much for bourgeois rule-of-law. Just another example in a history of literally millions of examples of how the system will always favor the ruling class and its state henchman over regular working people. The quote in my sig, once again, rings true. Trump stated that he was found guilty of "doing his job", and indeed, Trump is (for once) actually right about something: it is the job of the American Gestapo to keep those unruly workers in line.

An incident of injustice does not justify the elimination of justice. The president has unlimited power of pardon, with political consequences of his decisions. Joe is a monster who should never be given power, as is the president who pardoned him. Although, most presidents wait until their last few months so they seldom get blowback for pardoning reprehensibles like FALN Terrorists or Weather Underground friends.

I say Joe is a monster more in his sociopathic abuse of power, like the false arrest of James Saville, than in the zeal to expel illegal aliens from Arizona against the wishes of the Obama administration. "In 2004, victim James Saville’s family sued Arpaio for $10 million, after Saville was found not guilty of attempting to kill the sheriff. The county recently settled with Saville for an undisclosed amount. It only had to pay the above amount out of public coffers; its insurance policy covered the rest.".

But, I'm confident we will survive this political crisis. Arizona's persecuted undocumented aliens will need to be content with the political victory of getting Joe out of office, and getting him prosecuted for contempt of a Federal court. The ultimate victory of seeing an 85 year old bigot serve up to 6 months of jail time has been denied to his victims. But, often what goes around comes back around to bite. Hence, my life philosophy of trying to do good things, and my philosophy of defanging the power of potential tyrannical institutions. Like, our federal government.

Marx affirms the Lockian idea that, “As usurpation is the exercise of power which another has a right to, so tyranny is the exercise of power beyond right, which nobody can have a right to" (Locke 95). Marx was not advocating anarchy or calling for an abolition of government, but was wary of the problems associated with government, particularly when it was based on unequal notions of class. Marx saw that there were inherent problems in a government where there was an upper class or ruling elite and advocated a government that was part of the people—a government that was not based on the principles and revolution-inspiring problems class inequity presented in Victorian England at that time.

[FireIceTalon]

aliens

Workers. "Aliens" is such a dehumanizing, jingoist (and racist) term, even if that wasn't the context you were using it in. As if people from another country are not humans at all and are to be viewed as some foreign species that is a threat to our way of life.

[kandrathe]

aliens

Workers. "Aliens" is such a dehumanizing, jingoist (and racist) term, even if that wasn't the context you were using it in. As if people from another country are not humans at all and are to be viewed as some foreign species that is a threat to our way of life.

I mean it in the Latin, meaning foreigner;

alien (n.)
"foreigner, citizen of a foreign land," early 14c., from alien (adj.) or from noun use of the adjective in French and Latin. Meaning "residing in a country not of one's birth" is from mid-15c.

ξένος works, but it more means "Stranger". Someone I don't know.

[kandrathe]

On the sunny California campus of Berkley last Sunday, a peaceful protest turned violent when an Antifa gang curb stomped a Trump supporter. Two days later, Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., declared that the self-styled anti-fascists "deserve unequivocal condemnation."

It was the strongest criticism of the violent Left from any Democratic leader to date and not a single major conservative publication took note. That was a mistake, because there was plenty to praise in the Pelosi statement. Source

I, for one, would welcome more Democratic allies in the fight against violent repression of free speech by fringe Alt-left. And, in return, I think it would be fair for more Republicans to call out more incidents of hatred and bigotry in the fringe of their alt-right diaspora.

[Taem]

This is so outrageous. Do you think the officer was just being sarcastic, or is he sincerely a racist?

http://on.ktla.com/V7uDt

Perhaps there is still some good old boys mentally scum floating on the surface of the rest of society? It kind of reminds me of one of my friend who was a biker and had some good friends with Hells Angels, and according to him, they tried recruiting mostly intelligent and educated professionals to their ranks, so they'd have some actual clout if their members got into trouble. I suppose if you put the right people in the right places, even if a small part of society, you can make a huge difference to a whole section of people's lives.

However, I'm still quite cynical of that notion and still think the cop was just being a sarcastic idiot who lost his job.

[FireIceTalon]

Whether he was being sarcastic or not, he was completely out of line and deserved to be fired.

But I don't think he was just being sarcastic. You can believe that excuse if you want to, but I'm not buying it. Especially since it was in Georgia, one of the most notoriously racist states in the nation. I will give the cop credit for one thing, he spoke a half truth when he said "we only kill black people". Police certainly murder people of all races, but blacks are undoubtedly their favorite and they will jump on any chance they get to pull the trigger if there is a black person involved.

[kandrathe]

This is so outrageous. Do you think the officer was just being sarcastic, or is he sincerely a racist?

http://on.ktla.com/V7uDt

Perhaps there is still some good old boys mentally scum floating on the surface of the rest of society? It kind of reminds me of one of my friend who was a biker and had some good friends with Hells Angels, and according to him, they tried recruiting mostly intelligent and educated professionals to their ranks, so they'd have some actual clout if their members got into trouble. I suppose if you put the right people in the right places, even if a small part of society, you can make a huge difference to a whole section of people's lives.

However, I'm still quite cynical of that notion and still think the cop was just being a sarcastic idiot who lost his job.

I think yes, sarcastic, yes on insensitive to race issues, and I don't know if he's overtly racist. He's a tone deaf liability to the law enforcement department that employs him.

There is definitely still a "good old boys" network in the south. I've seen it from the inside, but it's purpose is not racism. Although, it's function supports entrenchment of the status quo, which perpetuates institutional racial bias. It is a complete xenophobia to anyone not in the network. It's like, "Unless you get a reference from an insider, I'm not going to help you unless it's in my own best interest." It's like even Hatfields versus McCoys type xenophobia, where the McCoys emigrated from a Yankee state 100 years ago, or you go to the wrong type of church.

But, identity group based benevolence is sort of an institution in the USA, or many... e.g. Elk, Moose, Jaycees, Shriners, Odd Fellows, Masons, Knights of Columbus, denominational, etc. They self help members with many things beyond networking, like scholarships for their kids...

I've had a book in my head for a number of years I'd like to write on "American Tribalism"... My mom, for example, was raised in a small rural Scandinavian emigrant town and was not allowed to date non- Swedish boys, or outside her parents denomination. I think it has changed since then, but still in rural areas, a modicum of xenophobia or "Y'all ain't from 'round here" test is probably firmly entrenched. When I was 9 (1970), we moved out of Minneapolis to a farm. The kids referred to me as a "City Slicker" until I got to high school (for 5 years).

In that way, Antifa is also a tribe. They attacked anyone "foreign" who they labelled "Nazi" to justify their "Othering" of them. You could be a college republican... Nazi. Or, just a UPS driver delivering a package... Nazi.

[Archon_Wing]

This is so outrageous. Do you think the officer was just being sarcastic, or is he sincerely a racist?

http://on.ktla.com/V7uDt

Perhaps there is still some good old boys mentally scum floating on the surface of the rest of society? It kind of reminds me of one of my friend who was a biker and had some good friends with Hells Angels, and according to him, they tried recruiting mostly intelligent and educated professionals to their ranks, so they'd have some actual clout if their members got into trouble. I suppose if you put the right people in the right places, even if a small part of society, you can make a huge difference to a whole section of people's lives.

However, I'm still quite cynical of that notion and still think the cop was just being a sarcastic idiot who lost his job.

Sarcastic or not, guy is scum.

On the sunny California campus of Berkley last Sunday, a peaceful protest turned violent when an Antifa gang curb stomped a Trump supporter. Two days later, Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., declared that the self-styled anti-fascists "deserve unequivocal condemnation."

It was the strongest criticism of the violent Left from any Democratic leader to date and not a single major conservative publication took note. That was a mistake, because there was plenty to praise in the Pelosi statement. Source

I, for one, would welcome more Democratic allies in the fight against violent repression of free speech by fringe Alt-left. And, in return, I think it would be fair for more Republicans to call out more incidents of hatred and bigotry in the fringe of their alt-right diaspora.

They went out just to start shit even though there was no alt-right rally. Looks like just a bunch of thugs wanting to break stuff; consistent with the rest of their behavior.

[kandrathe]

They went out just to start shit even though there was no alt-right rally. Looks like just a bunch of thugs wanting to break stuff; consistent with the rest of their behavior.

Optimistically, in the US, we are witnessing the liberals struggling with alt left extremists, as did the conservatives in dealing with alt right during the rise of the tea party. Or, political co-opting ( glomming on) to the more main stream narrative.

In the pessimistic it would be a decent into civil war. Or, topically, once you shut down free speech as a method of social discourse, you are really only left with violence as a means for changing society.

It's definitely riling up the right... Town Hall [read Right Wingnut] article on the trend of extreme left hypocrisy on condemning on the basis of race alone.

A not so prescient Opinion piece, The End of Identity Liberalism... article.

If you are going to mention groups in America, you had better mention all of them. If you don’t, those left out will notice and feel excluded. Which, as the data show, was exactly what happened with the white working class and those with strong religious convictions. Fully two-thirds of white voters without college degrees voted for Donald Trump, as did over 80 percent of white evangelicals.

The upshot being the "all in" democrat strategy employed in the last election brought about the unthinkable... the election of The Donald, a figure derided by both left and right, but solidly proclaimed for the middle class worker. I'm sure if the left continue in this direction they will alienate unions next. Already, the union leaders in Cleveland refused to support the Browns disrespect of the growing National Anthem protests.

[Quark]

I must have missed the Nazi running people over, with all this talk about alt-left.

[FireIceTalon]

I must have missed the Nazi running people over, with all this talk about alt-left.

Yea, no shit. Last few posts have had me perplexed, because they turn reality on its head.

There is no "alt-left" - at least not in the sense that Kandrathe is using the term. There is no radical left-wing group that has aligned itself with the Democratic Party that I know of (like the Tea Party did with certain factions of the Republican Party when Obama took office), since any leftist worth their salt knows the Democratic Party is a bourgeois party just as the Republican Party is - they both serve corporate interests and merely have disagreements on how best to manage the affairs of the capitalist class. One party is on the far right of capital, the other is center-left of capital and is not "leftist" in any meaningful sense of the word. A radical left wing group aligning itself with any faction of the Democrats, is an oxymoron and would cease to be "radical" the moment they did so.

And even if there is a so-called "alt left", this isn't anything new - the radical left has always existed as a resistance against capitalism and its evils through nearly the entirety of its history - and it will until the capitalist system and all its oppression are eradicated (you can count on it). We just had a presidential candidate that ran on an UNPRECEDENTED platform of hate, racism/sexism/homophobia, xenophobia, and anti-working class rhetoric, and he has continued to pander to white nationalist scum throughout his term thus far. A candidate so chauvinist and reactionary even by bourgeois standards that half the ruling class wants nothing to do with him. And you don't expect radical left resistance to develop against the hate and violence propagated by the same right-wing asshats that this administration is sympathetic towards? If so, you are absolutely living in a dream world. Violence by the alt-right is characterized and fueled by fear and hate and therefore manifests itself in the direction of discrimination and oppression. Violence by the left is SELF-DEFENSE against that oppression and discrimination. That's the difference.

This whole centrist "im better than both sides, and we can just solve all the worlds worst problems through pragmatic discourse" position is not only utopian, but its also the most PRIVILEGED, IVORY TOWER political position one can take, especially if you are a white, straight male. It fails to acknowledge the real-world, irreconcilable differences and interests that exist in peoples everyday lives - whether they are on the far right or far left. As one famous Howard Zinn once said (I'm not in the habit of quoting Soc Dems, but he is right on this one), "you cannot be neutral on a moving train". Most people who live in the every day real world, who have objective class interests and face real circumstances, do not have the luxury of being able to be "centrist".

[kandrathe]

I must have missed the Nazi running people over, with all this talk about alt-left.

Fanning the flames of extremism blows both directions... it has been amping up some number of years.

Obama to police: Dallas shooting was a 'hate crime'

At least some politicians continue being intellectually honest about ALL extremism. But, if you are suddenly outraged by the murder of Heather Heyer, then welcome to the political reality of the past two decades. Somewhere around 220 to 230 people were victims of extremism in the US in 2016.

All of it evil.

This whole centrist "im better than both sides, and we can just solve all the worlds worst problems through pragmatic discourse" position is not only utopian, but its also the most PRIVILEGED, IVORY TOWER political position one can take, especially if you are a white, straight male.

Yes, of course. We should just choose the flavor of our extremism, clean our weapons, and stockpile the ammo.

Color me the proud utopian, who'd rather we worked out our political differences with those utopian liberal ideals of democracy, the bill of rights, and submitting to the rule of law. I'm so white privileged cis male. How John Locke of me....

[FireIceTalon]

Obama is a multi-millionaire member of the bourgeois class. He has the privileged luxury of being able to be "centrist".

[kandrathe]

Obama is a multi-millionaire member of the bourgeois class. He has the privileged luxury of being able to be "centrist".

Ya, so cis male half-white, pull yourself up by your bootstraps, successful legal Harvard scholar of him. He virtually reeks of Thurgood Marshall! If it weren't for that pesky former President thing, he'd be a viable dems SCOTUS pick.

But... pop-quiz... how did Obama get to be a multi-millionaire?

According to definitions... "The bourgeoisie is the middle class, a class between the laboring class and the wealthy or aristocracy. The middle class is made up of people who need education for their work, or who are owners of small businesses. They include shop owners, but also include teachers, officials, doctors, and lawyers."

If multi-millionaires are bourgeoisie, we must be sub-proletariat scum... or, the gum stuck onto the bottom of the shoes of sub-proletariat scum.

[Archon_Wing]

The only 2 sides here are fascists and those that oppose fascism. Just because a group calls itself antifa doesn't mean everyone that is anti-fascist has to answer for them, as they do not hold a monopoly on opposing fascism. just as Athiests don't have anything in common besides the lack of believing in a God. In the end, these neo-fascists should be condemned even if not everyone opposing them was squeaky clean. So "alt-left" doesn't mean too much, as the range of people that oppose fascism can be quite huge and not all of them are delightful; the allegations of hypocrisy don't work, and Trump not outright condemning these White Nationalists is not analogous to "anti-fascists" not condemning Antifa or whatnot. OTOH it is funny we have the "both sides are the same" breeding extemenism somehow. Honestly, I have come to realize that's been a really bad thing to say on many issues as people really stop caring and think everything is the same when it often is. But then sometimes it isn't. I guess in an effort to not offend anyone, you offend everyone?

And I'm not entirely opposed to violence either-- certainly if one of these neo-fascists decides to heckle people then they do deserve what's coming to them should others defend themselves, or..... others defending those that can't. If say FIT were to get in a fight with a Neo-fascist (purely hypothetical!), I would most likely take his side in most scenarios. But when you see stuff like Antifa coming to an abandoned rally and bascially look for a fight, that's just a bit hard to sympathize with. I mean in previous riots they broke people's stuff that had nothing to do with the target of their scorn.

[kandrathe]

The only 2 sides here are fascists and those that oppose fascism. Just because a group calls itself antifa doesn't mean everyone that is anti-fascist has to answer for them, as they do not hold a monopoly on opposing fascism. just as Athiests don't have anything in common besides the lack of believing in a God. In the end, these neo-fascists should be condemned even if not everyone opposing them was squeaky clean. So "alt-left" doesn't mean too much, as the range of people that oppose fascism can be quite huge and not all of them are delightful; the allegations of hypocrisy don't work, and Trump not outright condemning these White Nationalists is not analogous to "anti-fascists" not condemning Antifa or whatnot. OTOH it is funny we have the "both sides are the same" breeding extemenism somehow. Honestly, I have come to realize that's been a really bad thing to say on many issues as people really stop caring and think everything is the same when it often is. But then sometimes it isn't. I guess in an effort to not offend anyone, you offend everyone?

And I'm not entirely opposed to violence either-- certainly if one of these neo-fascists decides to heckle people then they do deserve what's coming to them should others defend themselves, or..... others defending those that can't. If say FIT were to get in a fight with a Neo-fascist (purely hypothetical!), I would most likely take his side in most scenarios. But when you see stuff like Antifa coming to an abandoned rally and bascially look for a fight, that's just a bit hard to sympathize with. I mean in previous riots they broke people's stuff that had nothing to do with the target of their scorn.

Good insight. I'm not a pacifist either, when it comes to defending yourself from *real* physical violence. But, the current campus illogic is that the bad people (choose your totalitarian extremism) use hurtful words, and hurting the psyche is akin to throwing a punch, so you are justified in your physical retribution.

I guess it is a part of this time of intellectual deconstruction where our youth are torn between nihilism (belief in nothing) and existential totalitarianism( choose your cause, then beat people to death with it). Perceived threats, from men, environmental, xenophobia, etc. result in class being converted to masses by use of compelling propaganda.

Right-wing and left-wing politics are commonly thought of as being opposed, but I feel they represent different expressions of the same ideological spectrum and often function according to the same series of fundamental epistemic and anthropological falsities.

Whichever the lie, is it any less tragic that our children are at each other's throats, rather than looking to find common ground? The antifa vs neonazi clash is as ignorant an extremism as is possible if the face of the blood and body count left in the twentieth century by their representative bankrupt totalitarian ideologies. Unless you are utterly ignorant to the point of Guinness book of world records levels, or pathologically evil, you wouldn't find any shred of credibility in those agonizing pathways to annihilation.

Rather, I see the two sides being creative builders, verses various malevolent destroyers. Which would you rather to be the legacy of our children?

[Archon_Wing]

The only 2 sides here are fascists and those that oppose fascism. Just because a group calls itself antifa doesn't mean everyone that is anti-fascist has to answer for them, as they do not hold a monopoly on opposing fascism. just as Athiests don't have anything in common besides the lack of believing in a God. In the end, these neo-fascists should be condemned even if not everyone opposing them was squeaky clean. So "alt-left" doesn't mean too much, as the range of people that oppose fascism can be quite huge and not all of them are delightful; the allegations of hypocrisy don't work, and Trump not outright condemning these White Nationalists is not analogous to "anti-fascists" not condemning Antifa or whatnot. OTOH it is funny we have the "both sides are the same" breeding extemenism somehow. Honestly, I have come to realize that's been a really bad thing to say on many issues as people really stop caring and think everything is the same when it often is. But then sometimes it isn't. I guess in an effort to not offend anyone, you offend everyone?

And I'm not entirely opposed to violence either-- certainly if one of these neo-fascists decides to heckle people then they do deserve what's coming to them should others defend themselves, or..... others defending those that can't. If say FIT were to get in a fight with a Neo-fascist (purely hypothetical!), I would most likely take his side in most scenarios. But when you see stuff like Antifa coming to an abandoned rally and bascially look for a fight, that's just a bit hard to sympathize with. I mean in previous riots they broke people's stuff that had nothing to do with the target of their scorn.

Good insight. I'm not a pacifist either, when it comes to defending yourself from *real* physical violence. But, the current campus illogic is that the bad people (choose your totalitarian extremism) use hurtful words, and hurting the psyche is akin to throwing a punch, so you are justified in your physical retribution.

I guess it is a part of this time of intellectual deconstruction where our youth are torn between nihilism (belief in nothing) and existential totalitarianism( choose your cause, then beat people to death with it). Perceived threats, from men, environmental, xenophobia, etc. result in class being converted to masses by use of compelling propaganda.

Right-wing and left-wing politics are commonly thought of as being opposed, but I feel they represent different expressions of the same ideological spectrum and often function according to the same series of fundamental epistemic and anthropological falsities.

Whichever the lie, is it any less tragic that our children are at each other's throats, rather than looking to find common ground? The antifa vs neonazi clash is as ignorant an extremism as is possible if the face of the blood and body count left in the twentieth century by their representative bankrupt totalitarian ideologies. Unless you are utterly ignorant to the point of Guinness book of world records levels, or pathologically evil, you wouldn't find any shred of credibility in those agonizing pathways to annihilation.

Rather, I see the two sides being creative builders, verses various malevolent destroyers. Which would you rather to be the legacy of our children?

Well, it'd be definitely awful to punch someone over a disagreement. Maybe it's the influence of the internet? I mean I've had a few dipshits threaten to beat me up over an argument (even here lol!) though naturally it's as silly as it sounds. Although as you'd expect I'd imagine it's always the people that have never experienced actual violence that are the ones that encourage it casually, and usually when it does happens it turns out to not be as cool as it is on TV. Even if you were "right"

But the main thing I have is that all this seems to be an excuse. As in sort of a pretext for violence as opposed to any real disagreement. It's like people are pissed so they just need any excuse to go fuck shit up. The entire alt-right seems to be based around this with their war on the "establishment". Of course, a lot of well-meaning revolutionaries have learned the hard way (even as of late) that destroying everything doesn't always solve the problems. Arab Spring, French Revolution, etc. And really, the most telling part, is that the pro-statue demonstrators weren't mostly there to talk about the statue either. I mean that's the same as me saying "Someone stole Jews will not replace us! Blood and Soil! Oh, I'm here to protest my cookie being stolen. Oh and Jews! " But then again you see that shit over even something like sports. So it's not surprising.

It is perhaps true that the extremes have more in common with each other, and the respect for human life and dignity is probably the standard of which to judge.

That being said, I do think the NeoNazis and Racial Nationalists are only held back because of legal and societal obstacles as it is just not inherently peaceful and the recent normalization of it could worsen. But at least people are aware of this to some degree. I think the debate comes down to rather our current system of laws as well as the morality of our present society is able to resist this kind of nonsense. Though exactly where is this level nis a point is a contention

[kandrathe]

So, I have two thoughts....

There are two ways of countering injustice. One way is to smash the head of the man who perpetrates injustice and to get your own head smashed in the process. All strong people in the world adopt this course. Everywhere wars are fought and millions of people are killed. The consequence is not the progress of a nation but its decline…Pride makes a victorious nation bad-tempered. It falls into luxurious ways of living. Then for a time, it may be conceded, peace prevails. But after a short while, it comes more and more to be realized that the seeds of war have not been destroyed but have become a thousand times more nourished and mighty. No country has ever become, or will ever become, happy through victory in war. A nation does not rise that way; it only falls further. In fact, what comes to it is defeat, not victory. And if, perchance, either our act or our purpose was ill-conceived, it brings disaster to both belligerents.

But through the other method of combating injustice, we alone suffer the consequences of our mistakes, and the other side is wholly spared. This other method is satyagraha. One who resorts to it does not have to break another’s head; he may merely have his own head broken. He has to be prepared to die himself suffering all the pain. In opposing the atrocious laws of the Government of South Africa, it was this method that we adopted. We made it clear to the said Government that we would never bow to its outrageous laws. No clapping is possible without two hands to do it, and no quarrel without two persons to make it. Similarly, no State is possible without two entities, the rulers and the ruled. You are our sovereign, our Government, only so long as we consider ourselves your subjects. When we are not subjects, you are not the sovereign either. So long as it is your endeavor to control us with justice and love we will let you do so. But if you wish to strike at us from behind we cannot permit it. Whatever you do in other matters, you will have to ask our opinion about the laws that concern us. If you make laws to keep us suppressed in a wrongful manner and without taking us into confidence, these laws will merely adorn the statute books. We will never obey them. Award us for what punishment you like, we will put up with it. Send us to prison and we will live there as in a paradise. Ask us to mount the scaffold and we will do so laughing. Shower what sufferings you like upon us; we will calmly endure all and not hurt a hair of your body. We will gladly die and will not so much as touch you. But so long as there is yet life in these our bones, we will never comply with your arbitrary laws.

And... Let America Be America Again - Poem by Langston Hughes