3 ms·

Do you think all view points should be heard? Should Jewish and gay students have to debate Nazi's about whether or not they should be murdered? Should black an

by neaden 7y ago

Do you think all view points should be heard? Should Jewish and gay students have to debate Nazi's about whether or not they should be murdered? Should black and women students have to debate if they should count as property?

ralfd 7y ago
That insinuates Nazis or Slavers are in a position of power. The hierarchy is switched though: Nazis have to debate students how hard they can be punched.
- dashundchen 7y ago
  This doesn't make any sense. Where do students hold a position of real power, especially a position where they are inflicting violence on Nazis? Where is this debate happening?
  - Fins 7y ago
    If we look at all the college administrations that quickly crumble after students protest that they might have to pass past a building in which, had they gone inside, they could have heard something they would not like, this dismissal rings quite hollow. And once we look at riots in Berkeley, the guy who went a-shooting congressmen, or fine folks who had beaten up a gay POC journalist (a Quillette journalist, but still), well, not all of them are students, but they are doing just fine inflicting violence on whoever they designate as "Nazis", or "Fascists" or whatever the scare word is today.
    - dashundchen 7y ago
      OK, one instance of students (who were clashing with far-right protesters who were armed) and the rest which aren't students, so a complete non-sequitor. In that case I bring out all the right wing terrorists of the past decade. Christchurch shooter, Charleston church shooter, Charlottesville car attacker, Bundy ranch hostages, pro-Trump agitators in the Berkley protest you list, Pittsburgh synagogue shooting, Colorado planned parenthood shooting, Layfayette trainwreck shooting, Norwegian Brevik mass shooting, Comet Pizza and many Q-Anon related murders, it goes on and on. It appears the right wing is increasingly violent and radical, which has many people worried. Fascism starts with violence, anyone who recognizes the threat posed by right-wing terrorism understandably would want to stop it before it goes further. The world has seen where that ideology has taken us before, unfortunately it seems to be fading from collective memory.
      - Fins 7y ago
        Fair enough. As long as you don't try to gloss over that the left capable of violence just fine by itself, and that self-appointed "antifascists" need to be stopped, too. And bring up all the left terrorists of past decades, too. Red Brigades (very much antifa and all) alone killed about as many people as everything you list here. Although I do not think I've heard of "many" Q-Anon related murders, and as far as I recall nobody got killed at the pizzas place. I do find it interesting that any time antifa gangsters go on a rampage it's always because there are some "armed agitators", and basically they asked for it, and it's no big deal anyway, but one right-wing nutjob does something and it's always a part of some "vast right-wing conspiracy". These double standards are rather tiresome, especially if you manage to still remember that left-wing governments are way ahead of rightwingers in body count.
insickness 7y ago
Those are some extreme examples. What about the not so extreme cases? Who would decide which topics are acceptable? A slippery slope.
- neaden 7y ago
  I think extreme examples are useful. The Neo-Nazi's marching in Skokie is an extreme example of Free Speech, and the ACLU fought to allow it because the First Amendment is extreme. On the other hand, I believe that when you are dealing with a quasi-public space like a university we shouldn't be as absolutist with free speech claims. The question then becomes on where we draw the line. If on the other hand you believe that we should be extreme on free speech when it comes to universities and let the Nazi's march at University of Chicago as well as Skokie then clearly you would disagree.
  - insickness 7y ago
    You think Nazis shouldn't be allowed to march? What about communists? Why one and not the other? Communists killed far more people in the 20th century.
    - neaden 7y ago
      That is not what I said, I think you have to read a bit more carefully.

by neaden 7y ago

ralfd 7y ago

That insinuates Nazis or Slavers are in a position of power. The hierarchy is switched though: Nazis have to debate students how hard they can be punched.

dashundchen 7y ago
This doesn't make any sense. Where do students hold a position of real power, especially a position where they are inflicting violence on Nazis? Where is this debate happening?
- Fins 7y ago
  If we look at all the college administrations that quickly crumble after students protest that they might have to pass past a building in which, had they gone inside, they could have heard something they would not like, this dismissal rings quite hollow. And once we look at riots in Berkeley, the guy who went a-shooting congressmen, or fine folks who had beaten up a gay POC journalist (a Quillette journalist, but still), well, not all of them are students, but they are doing just fine inflicting violence on whoever they designate as "Nazis", or "Fascists" or whatever the scare word is today.
  - dashundchen 7y ago
    OK, one instance of students (who were clashing with far-right protesters who were armed) and the rest which aren't students, so a complete non-sequitor. In that case I bring out all the right wing terrorists of the past decade. Christchurch shooter, Charleston church shooter, Charlottesville car attacker, Bundy ranch hostages, pro-Trump agitators in the Berkley protest you list, Pittsburgh synagogue shooting, Colorado planned parenthood shooting, Layfayette trainwreck shooting, Norwegian Brevik mass shooting, Comet Pizza and many Q-Anon related murders, it goes on and on. It appears the right wing is increasingly violent and radical, which has many people worried. Fascism starts with violence, anyone who recognizes the threat posed by right-wing terrorism understandably would want to stop it before it goes further. The world has seen where that ideology has taken us before, unfortunately it seems to be fading from collective memory.
    - Fins 7y ago
      Fair enough. As long as you don't try to gloss over that the left capable of violence just fine by itself, and that self-appointed "antifascists" need to be stopped, too. And bring up all the left terrorists of past decades, too. Red Brigades (very much antifa and all) alone killed about as many people as everything you list here. Although I do not think I've heard of "many" Q-Anon related murders, and as far as I recall nobody got killed at the pizzas place. I do find it interesting that any time antifa gangsters go on a rampage it's always because there are some "armed agitators", and basically they asked for it, and it's no big deal anyway, but one right-wing nutjob does something and it's always a part of some "vast right-wing conspiracy". These double standards are rather tiresome, especially if you manage to still remember that left-wing governments are way ahead of rightwingers in body count.

insickness 7y ago

Those are some extreme examples. What about the not so extreme cases? Who would decide which topics are acceptable? A slippery slope.

neaden 7y ago
I think extreme examples are useful. The Neo-Nazi's marching in Skokie is an extreme example of Free Speech, and the ACLU fought to allow it because the First Amendment is extreme. On the other hand, I believe that when you are dealing with a quasi-public space like a university we shouldn't be as absolutist with free speech claims. The question then becomes on where we draw the line. If on the other hand you believe that we should be extreme on free speech when it comes to universities and let the Nazi's march at University of Chicago as well as Skokie then clearly you would disagree.
- insickness 7y ago
  You think Nazis shouldn't be allowed to march? What about communists? Why one and not the other? Communists killed far more people in the 20th century.
  - neaden 7y ago
    That is not what I said, I think you have to read a bit more carefully.