3 ms·

I take issue with calling the desire to do violence against people like me an "ideological difference"

BitwiseFool 4y ago
As a counterpoint, accusations of "violence" get thrown around with little restraint. "Silence is Violence" but I've also found that disagreements can equate to "denying my right to exist".
Karrot_Kream 4y ago
That was the point of Ira Glasser's stance. Him and other ACLU members defended the right of Neo-Nazis to march in Skokie, Illinois. Glasser himself and many of the other attorneys on the case were Jewish. They were protecting the rights of people demonstrating to advocate for doing violence against people like them. Viewpoints like this are mostly gone these days in the US. Liberalism has become unpopular on the Left (and it's always been just a suggestion on the Right in my experience).
- all2well 4y ago
  Most liberal countries have restrictions on outright hate speech. It's definitely possible to be a liberal and also oppose the right of Nazis to advocate for mass genocide.
  - plandis 4y ago
    Who defines hate speech? Do you need agreement from 100% of citizens or can a few politicians decide what a country can and cannot say legally before running afoul of hate speech laws?
    - seoaeu 4y ago
      Who defines what constitutes murder, what food safety regulations are, or any of a million other laws? It really doesn't seem like an unsolvable problem
  - oceanplexian 4y ago
    Free Speech isn't a "liberal" or a "conservative" value, it's an American value. The reason "hate speech" exists in European countries is because they have unresolved baggage from WWII, and rather than confront the problem, they decided to put a boot down and curtail civil liberties instead. None of that is relevant to the USA or has any bearing on our politics.
  - StanislavPetrov 4y ago
    The word "liberal" has been mangled to the point where it is essentially meaningless. As far as I'm concerned, anyone who believes the government should have the power to regulate the content of your speech, at the point of a gun, is in no way "liberal".
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
  - Karrot_Kream 4y ago
    There we have a case of prominent Jewish lawyers defending the right of Neo-Nazis, a group of people who advocate for violence against Jews, to protest. Here we have people suggesting we need legal restrictions around hate speech. Do you see the difference of values? Liberalism is about guaranteeing individuals' rights in the face of the State. My point is that the Left in the US has lost interest in it and are more interested in pursuing their policies regardless of how it affects freedoms. The Right has never really cared for Liberalism and so it's falling out of favor.
psyc 4y ago
Holding a desire to do violence is even more protected than saying it out loud or writing it down, which are also generally protected if they aren’t imminent incitement. Also, by now I've seen so many breathless statements by leftists who are literally shaking rn that so-and-so "denies my right to exist" and "wants me dead" that it doesn't even look like anything to me anymore. It's just a slogan. Letters of the alphabet strung together.
- seoaeu 4y ago
  If you're so completely devoid of empathy that you have no reaction to hearing that someone is afraid for their for their life, that says a lot more about you than it does about them.
  - caddemon 4y ago
    I don't think you have enough info to really judge OP. There's a reason everybody learns the boy who cried wolf story as a kid - it's human nature to become desensitized to something after frequent false alarms.
    - all2well 4y ago
      It's worth considering how recent advances in things like gay rights are, and how much more is left for things like trans rights. Why should I care more about debate club than about being able to make medical decisions for my significant other? It's one thing to consider a situation from afar, but having it bear down on you directly gives you a very different perspective.
      - caddemon 4y ago
        I mean sure, but you're making the discussion about a different (albeit related) issue than I was trying to address. For one thing, your comment states concrete concerns that could directly affect you, as opposed to the vague "fear for my life" sort of comments OP was referring to. But more importantly, my question is not whether OP was correct, it is whether stating this opinion on an internet forum with little other context is somehow enough info to make a judgement about his empathy/morals.

As a counterpoint, accusations of "violence" get thrown around with little restraint. "Silence is Violence" but I've also found that disagreements can equate to "denying my right to exist".

Karrot_Kream 4y ago

That was the point of Ira Glasser's stance. Him and other ACLU members defended the right of Neo-Nazis to march in Skokie, Illinois. Glasser himself and many of the other attorneys on the case were Jewish. They were protecting the rights of people demonstrating to advocate for doing violence against people like them. Viewpoints like this are mostly gone these days in the US. Liberalism has become unpopular on the Left (and it's always been just a suggestion on the Right in my experience).

all2well 4y ago
Most liberal countries have restrictions on outright hate speech. It's definitely possible to be a liberal and also oppose the right of Nazis to advocate for mass genocide.
- plandis 4y ago
  Who defines hate speech? Do you need agreement from 100% of citizens or can a few politicians decide what a country can and cannot say legally before running afoul of hate speech laws?
  - seoaeu 4y ago
    Who defines what constitutes murder, what food safety regulations are, or any of a million other laws? It really doesn't seem like an unsolvable problem
- oceanplexian 4y ago
  Free Speech isn't a "liberal" or a "conservative" value, it's an American value. The reason "hate speech" exists in European countries is because they have unresolved baggage from WWII, and rather than confront the problem, they decided to put a boot down and curtail civil liberties instead. None of that is relevant to the USA or has any bearing on our politics.
- StanislavPetrov 4y ago
  The word "liberal" has been mangled to the point where it is essentially meaningless. As far as I'm concerned, anyone who believes the government should have the power to regulate the content of your speech, at the point of a gun, is in no way "liberal".
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- Karrot_Kream 4y ago
  There we have a case of prominent Jewish lawyers defending the right of Neo-Nazis, a group of people who advocate for violence against Jews, to protest. Here we have people suggesting we need legal restrictions around hate speech. Do you see the difference of values? Liberalism is about guaranteeing individuals' rights in the face of the State. My point is that the Left in the US has lost interest in it and are more interested in pursuing their policies regardless of how it affects freedoms. The Right has never really cared for Liberalism and so it's falling out of favor.

psyc 4y ago

Holding a desire to do violence is even more protected than saying it out loud or writing it down, which are also generally protected if they aren’t imminent incitement. Also, by now I've seen so many breathless statements by leftists who are literally shaking rn that so-and-so "denies my right to exist" and "wants me dead" that it doesn't even look like anything to me anymore. It's just a slogan. Letters of the alphabet strung together.

seoaeu 4y ago
If you're so completely devoid of empathy that you have no reaction to hearing that someone is afraid for their for their life, that says a lot more about you than it does about them.
- caddemon 4y ago
  I don't think you have enough info to really judge OP. There's a reason everybody learns the boy who cried wolf story as a kid - it's human nature to become desensitized to something after frequent false alarms.
  - all2well 4y ago
    It's worth considering how recent advances in things like gay rights are, and how much more is left for things like trans rights. Why should I care more about debate club than about being able to make medical decisions for my significant other? It's one thing to consider a situation from afar, but having it bear down on you directly gives you a very different perspective.
    - caddemon 4y ago
      I mean sure, but you're making the discussion about a different (albeit related) issue than I was trying to address. For one thing, your comment states concrete concerns that could directly affect you, as opposed to the vague "fear for my life" sort of comments OP was referring to. But more importantly, my question is not whether OP was correct, it is whether stating this opinion on an internet forum with little other context is somehow enough info to make a judgement about his empathy/morals.