ACLU of California Statement: White Supremacist Violence Is Not Free Speech • Hacker News Board

Re: ACLU of California Statement: White Supremacist Violence Is Not Free Speech

#111

Post by GauntletWizard » Thu, Aug 17, 2017, 10:36 AM UTC

SwellJoe wrote: post #58

overflowstack wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Racism and hate speech are not indications of future violence. You can go to any internet space and find thousands of hateful and racist people. The chances of any of them committing violence is extremely low.

Right wing extremists are responsible for more terrorist attacks on US soil than any other group.

You're absolutely right, but that's also beside the point. The KKK probably directly killed more people in the 60s - Not just black people and jews, but people who disagreed with them, people who agreed with them but were caught in crossfire or misidentified. That organization is vile and despicable, and as much as it is still possible within the bounds of justice to prosecute and lock up those responsible for such reprehensible acts, I completely agree.

These terrorist acts, while pertinent to the current conversation, are not the same. We've (hopefully) moved on from the violence of our forebears, and the rise of white nationalism should be treated as a new occurrence. I hope it is one. The argument that it

The police should be on hand at these 'demonstrations'. Many of them are actually violent. Many more have peaceful if disgusting protestors, and a few truly vile people that will incite incidents - And these get out of hand very quick. Police should be quick to stamp out these brawls. They need to immediately arrest the criminals who instigate violent acts.

The important things to recognize are a) that the violence is instigated on both sides, and b) making yourself a target for violence is not an effective way of rooting out violence. They're correlated - Black Block members often toe the line in attempt to provoke. That's simply escalation. It make the Nazis think they're right and makes it easier for them to radicalize others - Because they're "being provoked", so why shouldn't they "fight back"?

Escalation only makes it worse. As the old adage goes - "Don't wrestle with pigs; You both get dirty and the pig likes it". Antifa is wrestling with pigs. You can't fight Nazi's by fighting them with fists - They like that. You need to fight them by being better than them, and quite frankly, when they're winning you need to re-evaluate if you really are.

Re: ACLU of California Statement: White Supremacist Violence Is Not Free Speech

#112

Post by lostlogin » Thu, Aug 17, 2017, 10:39 AM UTC

CodeWriter23 wrote: post #76

PhasmaFelis wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is Jewishness "an inherently violent ideology of ethnic cleansing"? For that matter, is Communism? Marxist-Leninist governments don't have a great track record, but there are plenty of individual pacifist hippie commies; the ideology of common ownership of production is not inherently violent and racist like Nazism and the Klan are.

I'm sure not all Jews condone the ethnic cleansing going on in the West Bank and Gaza. But I kinda think some people see the Israeli flag in the same light as Jews see the Nazi flag. And yes, I am speaking as a Jewish man. You might want to check your Russian History, particularly Stalin's era, to examine the violence inherent to the ideology of common ownership, when applied Soviet style. Scholars debate on whether…

If anyone is after anything on the topic, please try The Court of the Red Czar or The Young Stalin. Both by Simon Sebag Montefiore. Ironically a Jew with interesting views on Zionism and an excellent history of Jerusalem. The Radio New Zealand interview with him below covers his views on Zionism briefly.

http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/saturday/audio/...

Re: ACLU of California Statement: White Supremacist Violence Is Not Free Speech

#113

Post by lostlogin » Thu, Aug 17, 2017, 10:50 AM UTC

dmitrygr wrote: post #69

Deestan wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For instance, someone waving a nazi flag might feel to me like an incitement to violence, while to them it might feel like an expression of free speech, with no intention to incite violence. Disregarding how you both feel about it, waving a nazi flag legitimizes and strengthens an inherently violent ideology of ethnic cleansing. Intent - real or pretend - doesn't matter.

It is worrisome that you are not horrified by what you just said. YOUR view of what is and isn't "inherently violent" is your rule? What of people who view this differently? You DO know that the Nazi party of Germany was democratically elected right? It did plenty of good for plenty of innocent people who simply lived in Germany at the time. Also, you know, by your logic almost ANY flag shouldn't be waved. All countr…

Yes they were elected, but it wasn't democracy that lead to the events that followed and so I don't think this is a very fair argument you make. It might be true that Nazi rule benefited many at a particular point in time but I don't think many who lived through the period would argue that Nazi rule was net positive for Germany.

Re: ACLU of California Statement: White Supremacist Violence Is Not Free Speech

#114

Post by SwellJoe » Thu, Aug 17, 2017, 10:52 AM UTC

wooter wrote: post #96

SwellJoe wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here are a few: https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/25/us/tally-of-attacks-in-us... http://www.newsweek.com/2016/02/12/right-wing-extremists-mil... http://www.npr.org/2015/06/24/417192057/right-wing-extremist... http://www.newsweek.com/right-wing-extremism-islamist-terror... http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2017/aug/16/... http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics...

so? do you want to forgo the civil rights of muslims on a similar basis? of course not.

Comparing Neo-Nazis to Muslims is incredible, and it says something ugly about your beliefs about Neo-Nazis and about Muslims.

If, instead, you mean, civil rights for members of Muslim extremist organizations, then your comparison would be reasonable. So, you tell me. Should Al Qaeda be given permits for rallies across the US to recruit people to commit acts of terror?

We aren't talking about people who merely say racist things. No one is suggesting racists should have their speech curtailed, as repugnant as that speech may be. We are discussing groups that have as their stated goal the violent overthrow of the US government and imposition of a white ethno-state. It's not a secret that's what they stand for and what they are recruiting for. They talk about it pretty openly, and it can be confirmed by spending even a little time in their online or real world spaces.

It is false equivalence, and gross, to compare Neo-Nazis to Muslims. There is no similarity there. There are violent extremists that are Muslims, but it is not the stated purpose of the religion or the majority of the people (or even a notable percentage) who practice that religion. Neo-Nazis, the groups represented by the Unite The Right rally, are violent extremists, both in word and deed, and it isn't a secret or small percentage of their numbers. It is why the organizations exist.

Re: ACLU of California Statement: White Supremacist Violence Is Not Free Speech

#115

Post by SwellJoe » Thu, Aug 17, 2017, 10:59 AM UTC

setra wrote: post #97

SwellJoe wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here are a few: https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/25/us/tally-of-attacks-in-us... http://www.newsweek.com/2016/02/12/right-wing-extremists-mil... http://www.npr.org/2015/06/24/417192057/right-wing-extremist... http://www.newsweek.com/right-wing-extremism-islamist-terror... http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2017/aug/16/... http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics...

I have only checked the first link however the NYT article from 2015 states "48 have been killed by extremists who are not Muslim, including the recent mass killing in Charleston, S.C., compared with 26 by self-proclaimed jihadists, according to a count by New America, a Washington research center." The pulse nightclub shooting alone killed 49 people. That is more than the entirety of the post 9/11 number white supre…

I said "more terrorist attacks", which is accurate. I didn't make any claims about how deadly those terrorist attacks were. That Neo-Nazis aren't always good at terrorism is hardly a ringing endorsement or a thing to hold up as proof that we shouldn't be dealing with Neo-Nazi groups as terrorist organizations.

Then again, the Oklahoma City bombing was the deadliest terror attack on US soil in our lifetimes prior to 9/11, and was committed by a right wing extremist. It is sort of arbitrary to draw the line at 9/11 (though maybe reasonable since it was such a devastating attack, and kinda blows the curve for any sort of accounting of other kinds of terror).

Re: ACLU of California Statement: White Supremacist Violence Is Not Free Speech

#116

Post by makomk » Thu, Aug 17, 2017, 11:00 AM UTC

mayank wrote: post #34

gedy wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks, I'm referring to events such as the Berkeley Riots [1] where the violence was at least partly incited by Antifa. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Berkeley_protests

Correct. The ACLU is saying they would not defend Antifa if they were arrested for speech inciting violence.

The ACLU of California is carefully avoiding saying this, and it would be incredibly controversial if they did. After the Berkeley violence where masked antifa grabbed peaceful students they thought might be going to Milo's talk, pepper-sprayed them and beat them with weapons, the student newspaper ran a number of pieces supporting this and calling for future violence. I've seen numerous people on social media blaming the violence in Charlottesville on not taking the Berkeley approach, calling for this to happen at future events, and comparing antifa violence to Allied soldiers fighting the Nazis - including from respectable people in tech I follow who aren't usually political. More mainstream news organisations like CNN shy away from direct calls for violence in their flattering profiles, but they still run them.

The idea that antifa violence is wrong seems to be a fringe one in non-right-wing political circles. When the father of the woman murdered in Charlottesville called for peace and forgiveness from all, it was fascinating watching people online try and word their disapproval in ways that didn't seem too disrespectful.

Re: ACLU of California Statement: White Supremacist Violence Is Not Free Speech

#117

Post by generic_user » Thu, Aug 17, 2017, 11:05 AM UTC

cc81 wrote: post #109

CodeWriter23 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand fighting fascism with fascism.

It is not necessarily fascism just because they use violence. They view it as Nazis work towards a a violent society where certain minorities will be oppressed or even killed. So using violence to stop that is warranted just like it is for example warranted for the state to use violence to capture and hold a person that is preparing a terrorist attack. I disagree of course as even though I really dislike Nazis politi…

Americans are legally armed and have the right to defend themselves under the constitution. This ideology that Antifa is going to use physical violence to stop people in America from exercising there constitutional rights to free speech is one of the most dangerous ideas I have seen in some time.

These people in Antifa are going to get themselves killed and the people who use deadly force to protect themselves will walk away with out any charges. Its a miracle that there has not been any deaths up to this point.

Re: ACLU of California Statement: White Supremacist Violence Is Not Free Speech

#118

Post by wooter » Thu, Aug 17, 2017, 11:20 AM UTC

SwellJoe wrote: post #114

wooter wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

so? do you want to forgo the civil rights of muslims on a similar basis? of course not.

Comparing Neo-Nazis to Muslims is incredible, and it says something ugly about your beliefs about Neo-Nazis and about Muslims. If, instead, you mean, civil rights for members of Muslim extremist organizations, then your comparison would be reasonable. So, you tell me. Should Al Qaeda be given permits for rallies across the US to recruit people to commit acts of terror? We aren't talking about people who merely say ra…

i never drew an equivalence between muslims and nazi's but go ahead and get offended if you want

Re: ACLU of California Statement: White Supremacist Violence Is Not Free Speech

#119

Post by generic_user » Thu, Aug 17, 2017, 11:23 AM UTC

mschuster91 wrote: post #107

generic_user wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please do not condone the use of violence against (insert bad people) on HN. That is totally beyond any legitimate conversation and is illegal and morally repugnant.

I just said that there is nothing inherently fascist in beating up Nazis. That is not what you claim I said (that I condone violence).

I think your statement is very short and in the flow of the thread reads poorly if your intention was to say that committing violence can be done by people other then fascists.

It reads as an implicit moralization. But your correct that it is not an explicit statement. So if that was not your intention then I rescind my accusation.

Re: ACLU of California Statement: White Supremacist Violence Is Not Free Speech

#120

Post by setra » Thu, Aug 17, 2017, 11:32 AM UTC

SwellJoe wrote: post #115

setra wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have only checked the first link however the NYT article from 2015 states "48 have been killed by extremists who are not Muslim, including the recent mass killing in Charleston, S.C., compared with 26 by self-proclaimed jihadists, according to a count by New America, a Washington research center." The pulse nightclub shooting alone killed 49 people. That is more than the entirety of the post 9/11 number white supre…

I said "more terrorist attacks", which is accurate. I didn't make any claims about how deadly those terrorist attacks were. That Neo-Nazis aren't always good at terrorism is hardly a ringing endorsement or a thing to hold up as proof that we shouldn't be dealing with Neo-Nazi groups as terrorist organizations. Then again, the Oklahoma City bombing was the deadliest terror attack on US soil in our lifetimes prior to 9…

Generally we discard 9/11 from such discussions as it blows death toll comparisons out the window. Going post 9/11 stays both relevant to current times and removes the absolute worst events in both cases (Ok city, and 9/11).

Doing comparisons without these cases we get similar numbers for both factions within some wide margin of error. Looking at this from a per capita perspective though we have Muslim Americans that make up around 1% of the population by my googling having a similar terrorism death toll as the 32% of the population that is right wing white Americans (white Americans being 64% of the population. This would make that faction 32 times more dangerous per capita than the white right wing.