It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: LesMisanthrope
that is how it started in Germany in the 1930's and look what happened just a few years later, WWII!
originally posted by: Sargeras
a reply to: Dark Ghost
Ya pretty sad state of affairs in most of the west these days.
Glad I'm in America, where I might get fired, but I can't be charged criminally for "offending " others.
Or be arrested and charged for talking bad about migrants like in most of Europe.
originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: LesMisanthrope
I bet you are familiar with no more than 1% of the laws in your country.
Cowardly statement Les - and meaningless
I'll bet you don't actually care about any of this - past your need to move your clan's agenda forward
But, you know - whatever - and for what it's worth
originally posted by: TownCryer
a reply to: TheLaughingGod
The racist man wasn't arrested for disagreeing with the woman he called out. He was arrested for posting his racist comments on social media. Apparently there's a law in Australia that says public social media cannot be used to post racist comments. If the man broke this law, he should expect to be punished, just as if he violated any other law. I'm not saying it's a good law. I'm just saying it IS a law, apparently.
originally posted by: schuyler
This silly argument begs the question. What ARE the laws in Australia? I know for certain that libel laws are different in the UK and more restrictive than in the US, but I don't know about Australia. The question is: Did this guy violate an Australian law, yes or no? His statement was pretty hateful, for sure, but was it illegal?
Section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act makes it unlawful for someone to do an act that is reasonably likely to “offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate” someone because of their race or ethnicity. Section 18D of the Racial Discrimination Act contains exemptions which protect freedom of speech.
originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Spiramirabilis
Pretty much what I just said Les - what else you got?
Actually, quite a bit. Believe it or not I've studied it quite a bit in the hopes of writing about it, though I never posted or published it and no longer intend to. But for your pleasure:
Donald Trump has been called the Pied-Piper of Dog-whistle politics, which is fitting since the whole Republican party has been charged for engaging in dog-whistle politics for quite some time. The dubious insinuation in that charge is that Trump and the Republicans are speaking in secret code to racists, whom I wager are hiding in the bushes, like dogs, awaiting the long-awaited sound to bring in the coming race war.
The thing about a dog whistle is that only dogs can hear it. So when I am lead to believe that the right is engaged in “dog-whistle politics”, I have to wonder why these sounds seem to ring so loud in the ears of the left.
According to anti-conservative author Ian Haney Lopez’s book “Dog Whistle Politics”, when Nixon spoke of “Law and Order”, he was secretly passing messages to racist via inaudible code. To the racist hounds who were able to pick up on this covert racism, “Law” meant race and “Order” means anti-activism, as they tend to do.
When Paul Ryan had the audacity to link poverty to a “ tailspin of culture”, especially in the “inner cities in particular”, “of men not working” and “generations of men not even thinking about working or learning the value and the culture of work”, the words magically morphed into the inaudible sound of a racist dog whistle. Rep. Barbara Lee’s recognized this inaudible sound as a “thinly-veiled racial attack”, and that when Ryan spoke of “inner-city” and “culture”, he surreptitiously meant “black”. According to Ryan, race never crossed his mind. Nonetheless, to the ears of racists, he was secretly speaking about black people this whole time.
Jimmy Carter knew all too well that the animosity against President Obama from the right was because he was a black man, and not because of his policies, as has traditionally been the case. Mark Potok from the Southern Poverty Law Center agreed. "I think what President Carter said is precisely what is going on. I am not saying that everyone involved in opposing healthcare reform is a Klansman in disguise, but it is the elephant in the room." Congressman Henry Johnson echoed his statements. "I guess we'll probably have folks putting on white hoods and white uniforms again and riding through the countryside." The RNC chairman at the time and obvious racist Michael Steele denied the accusations.
Alex Hern, technology reporter for the Guardian, wrote on the subject of Republican dog whistles for the New Statesman. When a Mitt Romney aide commented that Romney would be a better president than Obama because be better understood the Anglo-Saxon heritage that Britain and America share, Hern’s ears started ringing. “This sort of statement is known in politics as a ‘dog whistle’,” he wrote. “To most people, it looks innocuous, if a bit weird, but to its target audience – in this case, racists – it reads as a perfectly clear statement that Romney is better than Obama because he is white.” And there you have it.
While it is probably true that there is a pack of racists out there making connections between such statements and racial stereotypes, the insidious assumption that the right are secretly speaking to racists in some sort of hidden inaudible code is a reckless and sloppy fantasy.
Rather, it appears the only racists able to both hear and translate the racist messages are the very same ones who always claim “dog-whistle politics”. To the extent that it is only they and perhaps some unscrupulous racists who are connecting irrelevant words to irrelevant racial stereotypes, it must be conceded that the dogs in tune to the racist dog-whistle are the very ones making such suspicious connections
I apologize to the OP, for this may be off topic.
originally posted by: CB328
This is crazy, but unfortunately I could see this happening here in the US.
A lot of people fear that hate crime laws are just a first step in that direction.
originally posted by: Dark Ghost
I don't condone any of the comments made by Nelson, but surely arresting somebody for making racist statements on social media is a step too far?
Edit Changed title and fixed some typos.