2 ms·
Most of the terrorist propaganda actually does not directly call for violence. Their recruiting is almost identical to white supremacist or other extremist prop
by alphabettsy 8y ago
Most of the terrorist propaganda actually does not directly call for violence. Their recruiting is almost identical to white supremacist or other extremist propaganda. Them saying “we must fight the infidels” or “strike back against the western imperialists” isn’t much different from people saying “we must take our country back”, “we must secure a future for white children”, or “there is an ongoing white genocide by the globalist elite.” The problem is where it leads and all the damage it does to society because most extremism starts seemingly benign, until it isn’t.
I don’t want people with differing opinions on healthcare, abortion, civil rights, etc. to be banned, but to me it’s more than a difference in political opinion when someone suggests people I care about are subhuman or citizens should be removed from the country by the millions.
Your “when they came for...” argument is actually a reference to a historical quote about the targeting of groups by the Nazi party. It’s hard for me to see the people wanting not to be labeled evil, subhuman, and criminal as playing the role of the Nazis in this case or how you could compare being told you can’t Tweet disgusting falsehoods with imprisonment or extermination.
- jki275 8y agoFirst, I don't think you've ever seen any terrorist propaganda. I have. It absolutely calls for violence. What you fail to realize is that those particular groups are recruiting into organizations that explicitly require violence against anyone who disagrees with them. I know it's popular to pretend that isn't true, it's just an "internal struggle" or whatever, but that's simply not the case. When they say "we must fight the infidels", they literally mean, we're going to take up arms and go and murder all the infidels, specifically including as many noncombatants as we can find. In general, people speaking in America aren't calling for that. I don't agree with what you refer to that they're advocating, and I think the right way to combat it is to argue why they're wrong, but they're not advocating murder of innocents. Those who do are falling afoul of the restrictions that have been allowed on speech and should be dealt with accordingly - making threats isn't legal. I'm well aware of where the comment came from. Again, restricting speech you disagree with is a slippery slope, and that's why we don't do it -- or didn't, until it became fashionable to shut down all forms of conservative discussion on media that has become left wing propaganda arms.