Far right hate speech. What should be done?

[Love Mountain]

Free speech does not include coercion of others, hence the "call to imminent lawless action" is a valid definition of the only possible exception.

Free speech includes incitement to violence, and which incitements of violence are protected or not is entirely arbitrary and subject to interpretation. It just happens that the interpretation is made by the highest court in the country.

[Heathen Hammer]

That's the problem with common law and concept of allowing unelected officials to make political decision in general. In this case, however, definition of "immedeate lawless/violent action" is quite clear.

[Aexodus]

Free speech includes incitement to violence, and which incitements of violence are protected or not is entirely arbitrary and subject to interpretation. It just happens that the interpretation is made by the highest court in the country.

Why is it arbitrary to prohibit coercive speech and not non-coercive speech of similar content.

[Love Mountain]

The problem with any such standard. It's entirely subjective and up to the legal apparatus to determine. Where is the line between "coercive" and "non-coercive". It's the same grey line that people struggle with when we ask when is economic co-operation "coercive" and when is it "consensual".

[mongrel]

... How does that show Breivik wrote the email, though?

Does it matter? One shouldn't hide the identity of a terrorist or potential terrorist simply because one's fan group approves of incitement of racial and religious hatred, or the killing Muslims and liberals, or indeed anyone else.

[Prodromos]

Does it matter? One shouldn't hide the identity of a terrorist or potential terrorist simply because one's fan group approves of incitement of racial and religious hatred, or the killing Muslims and liberals, or indeed anyone else.

The email author doesn't seem terrorist-y to me, just preparing for a defensive war against Muslims. Here's what he says:

[Israel] will mount a strike during the summer against all of its enemies in the middle east. This will make the muslims worldwide go into a frenzy, attacking everyone around them.

We are stockpiling and caching weapons, ammunition and equipment. This is going to happen fast.

Whether true or not, it seems defensive in nature. There's people stocking up on weapons in case FEMA wants to deport them or whatever, it's all perfectly legal.

Anyway, your post made it seem like Breivik and the email were connected somehow, and that's completely baseless.

[mongrel]

The email author doesn't seem terrorist-y to me, just preparing for a defensive war against Muslims. Here's what he says:



Whether true or not, it seems defensive in nature. There's people stocking up on weapons in case FEMA wants to deport them or whatever, it's all perfectly legal.

Anyway, your post made it seem like Breivik and the email were connected somehow, and that's completely baseless.

We will never know. And the e-mail said much more than that, it was a typical white supremacist civil war wish.

Geller herself said that she hid the man's identity on incitement grounds. She then buried the evidence altogether, after a terrorist attack . Any reaonable person with intelligence (both meanings of the word) would have passed it on . She chose not to.

[95thrifleman]

I get annoyed with this focus on the right while the left is given a free pass.

Untill the thread is re-titled "Political hate speech, what should be done?" and a frank, honest debate on extremes on both sides then the whole thing is hypocritical.

[Prodromos]

We will never know. And the e-mail said much more than that, it was a typical white supremacist civil war wish.

Geller herself said that she hid the man's identity on incitement grounds. She then buried the evidence altogether, after a terrorist attack . Any reaonable person with intelligence (both meanings of the word) would have passed it on . She chose not to.

No, she said it was insensitive, not incitement.

https://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/...rway-edit.html

Back in June 2007 I received an email from a disheartened reader in Norway who was bereft at the deterioration of the society and the lawlessness of life in Norway. It was a heartbreaking email, and I published it at the time: "Email from Norway."

After the massacre in Norway last week, I removed the following sentence from the email, as I found it insenstive and inappropriate: "We are stockpiling and caching weapons, ammunition and equipment. This is going to happen fast."

The sentence I edited is not an incitement to anything. It refers to self-defense, but I removed it in the light of recent horrific events in Norway. I thought it insensitive. Nothing more.

Everyone has a right to self-defense.

The idea that I am scrubbing my archives, or "evidence" as many liars are suggesting, is a blatant lie. I have changed nothing else. But that is irrelevant; destroying the counter jihad movement is paramount at this moment. Even more farfetched is the lie the lefties (and even the freepers) are advancing: that the email was written by Breivik. Insanity, folks.

Breivik did not write the letter. Many Norwegians see their country imploding. The email was not written by Breivik, and contrary to popular leftist belief, not every Norwegian is Anders Breivik.

The smear merchants and destroyers trying to tie me to Breivik are engaging in another fallacious attack on those of us who are fighting against supremacism, violence and evil.

This is orwellian propaganda. Here is the original post before the sentence was edited out.

...

UPDATE: This one is for the nutballs and the cannibals who live to watch Atlas sway and sashay.

After the monstrous massacre in Norway on July 22,2011, I re-ran a 2007 post (Email from Norway) as evidence of the deteriorating conditions in Norway. Clearly it had been decaying for some time (the post was four years old). Norway was hardly idyllic. I realized the remark about the fear of civil war and the defense of stockpiling weapons was insensitive so close to the mass slaughter, so I edited it out for the time being. I knew it was out there, I posted it and saw it at Free Republic. The point of the post wasn't the self-defense, it was the hopelessness and fear.

I hardly realized that the cannibals would chew off their own hooves to create some false narrative to discredit me. Insaner still, the Muslims and the leftist shills are creating a fiction out of whole cloth, fantasizing that Breivik wrote this email. He, of course, did not. Nor is he the only Norwegien aware that his country is dying. His evil agenda, hatched in 2000, made him as ugly and violent as the enemy he fought against. He became the barbarian he so loathed.

That said, it seems that humanity has no place among the savages who traffic in libel and destruction. And so the email is unedited, and just as it was when the author of this tragic note wrote of his lost country.

[Heathen Hammer]

The only way to prevent violence and extremism is by having a free market of opinions, where bad ones lose in the constant debate, as opposed to creating system where quality of opinions is determined by government official's whims, like what they have in countries like Russia and UK. People who whine about how it is bad to allow speech to "extremists" tend be actual extremists themselves, just look at posting history of people who defend "hate speech" law in this thread.

[Love Mountain]

I get annoyed with this focus on the right while the left is given a free pass.

Untill the thread is re-titled "Political hate speech, what should be done?" and a frank, honest debate on extremes on both sides then the whole thing is hypocritical.

That's because there's very little "far-left" hate speech that isn't condemned and reviled by everyone, left-wingers included. What is typically coined as "far-left" hate speech, is either so extreme and bizarre that is quickly renounced by literally everyone, or it's not actually "hate-speech. A good example of what right-wingers whine about is stuff like this. If this is the other "political extreme" I'm supposed to be worried about, then it's a non-issue for me. Islamic terror, neo-nazis, nationalists? Way more important to pay attention to.

[Aexodus]

‘Left wing’ hate speech can include racism against Jews and racism against whites. I wouldn’t categorise Islamic ‘hate’ as either left or right.

For example, the acclaimed and award winning writer Susan Sontag, said to be one of the most influential critics of her generation, you have this:

The white race is the cancer of human history; it is the white race and it alone—its ideologies and inventions—which eradicates autonomous civilizations wherever it spreads, which has upset the ecological balance of the planet, which now threatens the very existence of life itself.

She later recanted the statement, saying it slandered cancer patients. Susan Sontag is a white woman, if it matters.

[Love Mountain]

Sure, but something hardly anyone on this board sympathizes with. On the other hand, if I recall the Charlottesville thread about Heather, we had several members who were actively defending the guy.

[Aexodus]

How is that hate speech.

[Love Mountain]

I'm not saying it's hate speech. I'm saying that the things "leftists" and "conservatives" on this board complain about, differ in their extremes. This is all in response to the comment by 95thrifleman that the Left is given a "free pass" on this kind of stuff. It isn't, in fact, the Left is good at moderating itself.

[Pontifex Maximus]

Free speech includes incitement to violence, and which incitements of violence are protected or not is entirely arbitrary and subject to interpretation. It just happens that the interpretation is made by the highest court in the country.

What a ridiculously simplistic and uninformed argument made with regards to fighting words. Your obviously biased applications of this legal exception may be lost on others, but I'm thoroughly unconvinced. Your pathetic and undemocratic efforts to undermine free speech on a partisan line are simply laughable. You're fooling nobody but yourself.

[95thrifleman]

I'm not saying it's hate speech. I'm saying that the things "leftists" and "conservatives" on this board complain about, differ in their extremes. This is all in response to the comment by 95thrifleman that the Left is given a "free pass" on this kind of stuff. It isn't, in fact, the Left is good at moderating itself.

Not in my country. British politics has become scary with the left increasingly hostile, aggressive and showing extreme rhetoric. You never saw effigies of Labour politicians hanging from bridges yet this kind of thing is common from the left these days. The anti-semitism is just the tip of the iceberg since the far left felt legitimised by Corbyn's leadership.

[mongrel]

How is that hate speech.

What? That liberals deserve to be murdered? Surely not difficult to understand.

[Heathen Hammer]

Pointing out that trial was unfair and influenced by political bias and ignored crucial evidence isn't saying that liberals should be murdered.

[mongrel]

Pointing out that trial was unfair and influenced by political bias and ignored crucial evidence isn't saying that liberals should be murdered.

What. Murdered liberals don't deserve justice?