BREAKING Multiple people stabbed at far-right rally, and counter protest

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: Dragoon01

So that means that the racists are victims?

Dang, we should feel sympathy for the racists?

Are you having a completely different conversation than I am?
Do you have a reading problem?

I have made no such statement or implied that "racists" are victims.
I have no clue what you are referring to.

a reply to: Dragoon01

Wait, wasn't your point

But many people use that just like they are using the "NAZI's are right wingers" They use it to try and associate the entire right with Nazism.

But in this case they are so, your point is moot.

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: amicktd

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: amicktd
So a bunch of racists got stabbed by minorities? Sounds like they got what what was coming to them. You can't go around spreading hate and expect a safe place as well.

Well said!

We should always kill those with whom we disagree with!

*clap*

Didn't know you feel that way, good to know.

Just thought I'd agree with an authoritarian stance for a change.

It gets tiring pointing out a hatred of freedom of expression.

You must not read much.

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: Dragoon01

Wait, wasn't your point

But many people use that just like they are using the "NAZI's are right wingers" They use it to try and associate the entire right with Nazism.

But in this case they are so, your point is moot.

And as has been repeatedly pointed out, No they are not Right wing. Please try to keep up.

Just because you keep saying it does not make it so. You need to actually understand the actions taken by the Nazi's and the Fascist and the results of those actions. If you had an actual open mind you would see then that their actions (regardless of what labels are applied) are far more inline with Left wing progressive policies and actions. I know you dont care, so just keep lying to yourself if it makes you feel better.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: MystikMushroom

So restricting free speech is just preemptive actions to stop possible deaths?

ok....so I guess you would be going to court and suing over 1st amendment rights, if you kept calling a black person n****r to his face, over and over, and he punched your lights out because of it....I wonder what the judge or a jury would say in that case?.....

a reply to: Dragoon01

In your opinion they are not right wing but not everyone has to agree with you. Even the graph that you brought up doesn't agree with you.

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: Dragoon01

In your opinion they are not right wing but not everyone has to agree with you. Even the graph that you brought up doesn't agree with you.

And I addressed that. I said that graph had problems and the placement of the Nazi and Fascist was the biggest of those problems.
I dont know the source of that graphic so I cant comment on how they derived their placement, but the Nazis and Fascist would more correctly be placed at the very top center. The extreme of totalitarian. A blob that crossed both left and right. While the Nazis had Nationalistic aspects which is traditionally a right wing characteristic their economic and social policies were fully in the camp of the left. So they stride the middle but at the very extreme of Authoritarian /Totalitarian forms of government.

Basiclly I see this:

"I should be able to say whatever hate-filled garbage I want to people's faces and they should just take it!"

"No one is allowed to disagree or be upset with the hate I feel!"

Yes, people these days want zero responsibility for their hate.

I think I'm going to start trying to organize "responsibility-free-zones" for racists who want to stand and spew their hate, and they can be protected and safe from experiencing consequences.

You reap what you sow. If you spew hate, don't be surprised when someone returns it in kind.

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: MystikMushroom

So restricting free speech is just preemptive actions to stop possible deaths?

ok....so I guess you would be going to court and suing over 1st amendment rights, if you kept calling a black person n****r to his face, over and over, and he punched your lights out because of it....I wonder what the judge or a jury would say in that case?.....

The Black person would be arrested for Assault (because it is).

There are some jurisdictions that would take into consideration what are called "fighting words" and he probably would get off from the charge (which he should).

a reply to: Dragoon01

Neo nazis are not WWII nazis or fascists.

a reply to: MystikMushroom

You dont really have the right to assault people just because they make you angry with the words they say.
As I pointed out above, you may avoid a charge but you will get a ride.

You dont have a right to NOT be offended.

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: Dragoon01

Neo nazis are not WWII nazis or fascists.

Neo-Nazis are collectivist. Sure they are more to the right than say a Che wearing commie but they are still riding that vertical line right up to Totalitarian. They just disagree with Che guy on WHO gets included in the collective.

a reply to: Dragoon01

If I walk into a Biker bar and start talking crap about the bike gang...

Would anyone be surprised if I got a black eye?

Could I then turn around, sue them and make myself into a martyr and victim? I knowingly walked into a den of bikers and intentionally antagonized them.

But hey, it's my RIGHT, isn't it? I have the right to free speech to say whatever the hell I want! I should feel safe and protected and free of any consequences!

See, we can protect the right to free speech, but when we start protecting people from the consequences of that speech? When we start making the victims of those consequences into victims and martyrs?

That's a reach/stretch.

originally posted by: Dragoon01
Neo-Nazis are collectivist. Sure they are more to the right than say a Che wearing commie but they are still riding that vertical line right up to Totalitarian. They just disagree with Che guy on WHO gets included in the collective.

Nothing on any chart is free of collectivism. Even anarchists have to collectivly agree to be anarchists.

Whoever came up with the line graph and whoever added the vertical axis to that defined what right center and left mean and why a political ideal goes where it goes.

I'm not sure I understand what you think right means but by your use of the word collective I take it that you might be an anarcho-capitalist. If that is the case I understand the idea that anything other than anarchy is on the left. That is not how other people use those terms.

originally posted by: MystikMushroom

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: MystikMushroom

So restricting free speech is just preemptive actions to stop possible deaths?

Say whatever the hell you want, but don't be surprised by the repercussions.

Words have consequences.

Free speech often does. It's the price we pay for living in a free society.

a reply to: DBCowboy

Look at the magical thinking implicit in the claim "words have consequences". Words can manipulate and move matter, aka, sorcery.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

They seems to make you bring up this lame argument over and over.

a reply to: daskakik

Is this lame argument false?

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

The world is made of language...

Words have altered and shifted the entire course of history. Words have toppled empires and allowed mass genocide and horrible crimes to occur.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Yes, it's a strawman.

The phrase "Words have consequences." doesn't imply magic.