Vilageidiotx

Why I am against the criminalization of the KKK - and why you should be too.

@Vilageidiotx My one problem with the whole 'punching a nazi is now ok!' was because of the fucking hypocrisy. Advocates of equal rights suddenly running out to punch people purely for disagreeing with them.

I wouldn't even have a problem with that if the guy that punched him was a real tough guy like he tried to be and a) didn't wrap his face to hide it and b) didn't run away like a fucking pussy.

@Buddha

Eh, I agree it's hypocrisy when you see people defending one person calling for mass murder but punching the other. And I would be appalled if we starting calling for state round-ups, not for a love of Nazi's so much as from a fear of precedent. But I do think calling for mass murder is an indefensible thing beyond simple political debate.

I can see what you mean about the guy running off though. Running off is pretty weak.

Why I am against the criminalization of the KKK - and why you should be too.

"Talk shit, get hit" is a pretty general statement, and when it comes down to it, what you are saying is that it's okay to hit people if you disagree with them strongly enough. Well, I mean, what you are actually saying is that it's okay to hit people if you, specifically, disagree with them strongly enough.

What was violated was whatever his name is' right not to get beat up in the street. The right to free speech isn't the only right people have, and that you apparently believe that mob rule overrides law is absolutely appalling to me.

Additionally, where I'm from, most people wouldn't approve of you flipping out and starting a fight because somebody insults you.

@Maxwell

You're being hyperbolic and you know it. Calm down. I didn't say the entire crowd should have kicked him senseless (though I do admit I wouldn't defend the guy in the slightest if that happened), I'm just saying a tap on the jaw wasn't the end of the fucking world, and that he earned it by being an evil shit. And also, legal intervention isn't wrong. I would also have no problem if the guy who punched the Nazi was jailed. That's the way the law is supposed to work.

And like I said before, this might be my midwestern hick blood talking. If it's more normal for your people to pout when someone says they want to kill your family, that's cool too.

Why I am against the criminalization of the KKK - and why you should be too.

<Snipped quote by Vilageidiotx>

By this logic, big, burly men have a much greater right to freedom of speech than women and weaker men.

@Maxwell

You're generalizing. The grand majority of things in politics aren't talking shit. Different opinions about economics, warfare, etc, are just that; opinions. But when you say "All the jews must die" or something to that effect, that isn't exactly the same sort of deal. If you say in public that you want my friends, family, or even myself to die? To me it doesn't just become sterile politics because you tie it into a shitty philosophy. If someone says "Your girlfriend should die" right there to your face, most witnesses would accept a punch as a result. So if they say "X group of people that include your girlfriend should die because of Y and Z", yeh, I don't see that as much of a difference. Remember too, we aren't talking about just chance suffering like most other political ideas ideas. Libertarians might say "I don't want taxes to pay for the healthcare of the poor" but this isn't exactly personal. Even if you are a poor person who desperately needs publicly funded healthcare, that libertarian opinion isn't talking shit because any suffering you receive is incidental and not the direct purpose of the libertarian. They didn't take away your healthcare because they wanted you to suffer, they took it away because they disagree with the concept of public funding. Even if a person supports a war, any deaths resultant are incidental because it is the goal of the war and not the deaths themselves that are the direct want of that person. But a Nazi fuck saying they want to kill all the Jews? Yeh, killing Jews is the direct purpose of their philosophy. If the Libertarian's changes resulted in no suffering, he would be happy. If the pro-War guy managed to win his war bloodlessly, he would be tickled shitless. But if the Nazi comes to power and no Jews were hurt or killed by his regime, he would be let down, because he cannot succeed in his mission without a large group of people either suffering violence or death. Hell, even if you are one of those especially dishonest Nazi's who talk about the peaceful creation of ethnostates, there is still mass violence in the forced removal of millions of people.

And like whats-his-face said above, Freedom of Speech is in place to keep the government from deciding what can and cannot be said. It isn't in place to protect shit talkers from being slapped by those they talk shit toward. That silly Nazi fuck who got punched did not have his freedom of speech violated, just his stupid face.

And I'd like to think I'm a fair person. That crazy fucking professor who wanted to wipe out white people? Yeh, they earned a tap on the jaw. It's not a right wing or left wing issue, it's an issue of it being beyond the pale to call for mass murder.

Borgies pls go

There are anarcho-communists.

All anarchism means is there is no state. All communism means is that the workers control the means of production (ie property and machinery belong to those who use them rather than those who own them in the abstract form of capital). You can have both.

Why I am against the criminalization of the KKK - and why you should be too.

@Vilageidiotx Doesn't cost shit here except some evidence that, like, there's actually people gonna show up. If it's a small protest (1-10 people?) you don't even need a permit, lol.

@Buddha

I don't think small groups here usually get permits. It's the big stuff, like that Women's march, that might need permits. I honestly don't know much about it because I don't go to protests so I just hear shit second hand from those who do.

Why I am against the criminalization of the KKK - and why you should be too.

@Vilageidiotx Even neo-nazi groups aren't enough to warrant this all because the same principles I just proposed in the OP also apply to neonazi groups. Repression = faster and heavier radicalization. It's a timebomb.

Ban on masks has already been imposed in Europe. Specifically motorcycle helmets and balaclavas. Wearing them anywhere other than on a motorcycle will get you arrested. Not hard to hold up, and it's not arbitrary since they are 2 well defined clothing articles. So far it has worked. Somewhat.

And since protests typically need permits (here in the Netherlands, unsure about US, can't imagine it's different there though) it'd be pretty easy to just have oversight, and pick out those people wearing clothing that is too concealing. I suppose a warning could be given first, but really, they'd just re-enter the crowd and put it back on.

I remember the G20 in Toronto had heavy problems with this type of shit, where people would conceal themselves, break down Starbucks and other 'capitalist' symbols, and then disperse and undress and rejoin the regular protesters. It was hard to deal with.

@Buddha

They do, though protest permits are about as controversial as gun permits. The idea you might have to purchase your rights rankles people.

Why I am against the criminalization of the KKK - and why you should be too.

<Snipped quote by j8cob>

Given that these cunts exist and show up everywhere I am not wholly against the criminalization of masks at protest. If you are peacefully protesting something you don't need to hide your identity.

<Snipped quote by Vilageidiotx>

Like said, theoretically the rights can be changed (and they have in Europe in some cases, as have the constitutions) but for America I don't see it happening, considering the US has not changed their constitution much as far as I am aware. So you're not wrong, but just because something is a right doesn't mean you have unequivocal access to it at all times.

As for monitoring known members, this shouldn't be hard but so far the US has failed tremendously as the KKK is very prominent in rural areas in terms of obtaining seats of power in the police department for example.

@Buddha

It could be changed, but I don't see it happening. The optics of changing the first amendment are pretty damned bad. To change the constitution, we have to A: Call a constitutional convention, which hasn't happened since 1789, or B: Two thirds of both houses have to vote for it, and then 38 of the 50 states have to ratify, which has only happened 18 times in US history. That's a massive undertaking so it only ever really happens when something is popular with both political parties. Nobody really gives a shit about the KKK because they've pretty much been left behind. Neo-Nazi groups are more prominent now.

Also, a ban on masks is going to be a hard one to hold up. It's arbitrary and will probably have a hard time holding up in courts. Not to mention, it's not like Antifa groups are exactly worried about following the law - if they show up and start doing shit that is blatantly illegal, like throwing bricks and shit, it's not like they are going to leave the masks behind. All an anti-mask law does is create an excuse for cops to start making mass arrests quicker. In them same sense when a brick is thrown they'll arrest all the protesters in a sweep, if some dude shows up in a mask they'll now start the same round-up process sooner.

1st Amendment frees you from the persecution from government or its affiliates.

Your 1st amendment does not protect you from the consequence of your "speech"

Yes, I believe you should not be arrested for spouting idiocy, however, don't be surprised when someone who doesn't want to listen to your BS hauls off and knocks you out, at his own risk of litigation.

I always back my 1st with my 2nd...RAH?

@cpldingo

I actually agree with this more or less. Maybe I'm too much of a redneck, but "talk shit, get hit" seems like a fair rule. After all, we are talking about somebody being punched, not somebody getting lynched, it's not the end of the damned world. If someone spouts off about your girl, everyone in the vicinity will consider punching the dude an acceptable response, even though in the cosmic sense that is a pretty small offense. If someone is sitting there saying your entire race, or a racial group that might involve friends or family, should be wiped out, that doesn't become some sort of sacred speech by honor of having a political bent. Naw, it's plain talking shit, and by the laws of common decency, it can be responded to by a hit. Don't kill the guy, just bruise him up a bit.

And, like you said, the law has to be impartial, so the puncher in either situation risks an assault charge. That's fair too.

I do think violence can have a place in politics. Shit, I think if you are an American and you say violence doesn't have a place in politics, you are a hypocrite. But, I only support violence if I think it is going to have a positive effect (or if it follows the talk shit rule). Berkley was dumb (though Berkley does that shit every couple of years). Smashing up some woman because she voted a different way and then fucking up a few windows is useless violence. Of course, the Boston Tea Party was useless violence... that's the funny thing about history. If tomorrow the left wing went into full revolt and somehow eventually won, Berkley could become something at the same level as the Boston Tea Party. But as of now, it's just dumb violence.

Why I am against the criminalization of the KKK - and why you should be too.

On a somewhat related note, I am all for the criminalization of masks. There is no constitutional right to clothing choices. From protesters to luchadors, you have no rights to your own identity. There will be no identity fuckery.

And perhaps finally I can find out who that goddamn Spiderman is!

@j8cob

well there goes the KKK.

Banning the KKK right now would be silly. They used to be a major terrorist organization. They are now a sort of outcast hick version of the Lions Clubs. The KKK fifty years ago was burning crosses and lynching people. The KKK now hands out pamphlets and keeps up their news letter.

And besides that, we don't typically ban organizations because... you can't. In the United States (where the KKK are) we are constitutionally guaranteed freedom of assembly (in the first amendment). You must have legit evidence of criminal conspiracy to bust them up. That's why the federal government, when they seriously wanted to expend the effort on breaking up groups, had to use shady methods to get away with it, bending the law a bit.

What we can do is monitor known members though. After all, in this racially charged time, it's not hard to imagine a situation where the KKK comes back into prominence.

Every time you walk into a room, a song plays

Day 1.

is your shirt made out of the top of a pool table?