-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Tensions grow inside ACLU over defending speech rights for the far right
- Thread starter Shard
- Start date
Massive Duck. C.M.
Banned
Big ups to the Cali chapters breaking off.
There's an update from WSJ: https://www.wsj.com/articles/aclu-c...te-groups-protesting-with-firearms-1503010167
Good.
Good.
Bornstellar
Member
Ftfy.
I think it's probably fair to look at what ultimately happened then, what happened to the European countries that did censor hate speech, and also the volatility being displayed today along with new tools for mayhem. I think from the perspective of then it was a necessary evil, but today I don't think it's worth allowing this stuff to grow and for them to actively endanger other people.
MAYBE it could still be considered defending free speech if they come completely unarmed. But that didn't happen for the uncanceled rally. Nor was it even with a conventional weapon we had a murder happen.
MAYBE it could still be considered defending free speech if they come completely unarmed. But that didn't happen for the uncanceled rally. Nor was it even with a conventional weapon we had a murder happen.
Lightning_Roller
Banned
Wow this is likely to be a huge blow to Nazis, right?
Yes actually.
Chmpocalypse
Blizzard
Agreed.
sazzy
Member
This seems reasonable and sensible.
That's one way of trying to please both sides.
LiveFromKyoto
Member
"To those who support suppressing propaganda they hate, we ask — where do you draw the line?"
Dumb logic is dumb.
You draw the line at the murderous people who want to destroy the things and people you stand for.
Dumb logic is dumb.
You draw the line at the murderous people who want to destroy the things and people you stand for.
Zaraki_Kenpachi
Member
Probably no one will read the pamphlet and rather continue their hates towards the ACLU. Hopefully people will realize that they defend the rights of everyone, even people you don't like.
It still amazes me that all the fucked up people, especially those people elected into power are getting less pushback and public criticism than the ACLU.
The above comic really misses the mark, no one is arguing you have to respect them. That's arguing against no one, and if you hate it that much you can change the laws but in the meantime, their Creed has been to uphold the law.
It still amazes me that all the fucked up people, especially those people elected into power are getting less pushback and public criticism than the ACLU.
The above comic really misses the mark, no one is arguing you have to respect them. That's arguing against no one, and if you hate it that much you can change the laws but in the meantime, their Creed has been to uphold the law.
Lightning_Roller
Banned
Nice.
yanipheonu
Member
"To those who support suppressing propaganda they hate, we ask where do you draw the line?"
Dumb logic is dumb.
You draw the line at the murderous people who want to destroy the things and people you stand for.
Ah this is a good image, thanks for sharing!
The overly simplistic view of Free Speech needs to be challenged whenever it comes up.
Free speech includes the responsibility to disallow speech that would jeopardize that free speech.
It's a paradox, but that's reality: it's rarely simple.
Figures a post like this pops up while I'm making one. Yeah, I think that would be a reasonable compromise, armed rallies don't deserve protection.
I like how it had an actual example of somebody using Anti-Nazi speech provisions so silence other groups he didn't like.
Zaraki_Kenpachi
Member
That's the takeaway you got for the ACLU? They've been publicly arguing that Nazis are never violent?
Good grief
entremet
Member
What does that matter? This position would have done nothing to change Charlottesville. They didn't march with guns, they ran people over. They don't have to lobby against first amendment rights for Nazis, but damn, I'm sure they can find something more worth while to do. Resources are limited, after all.
Edit:
I guess they just left that their guns at home when they were on campus?
In any case, no one got shot. The outcome would not have changed.
LiveFromKyoto
Member
I don't think you read it properly. It's based on Popper's Paradox of Tolerance:
The "where do you stop?" question is just a slippery slope fallacy based on overly simplistic thinking, it's very easy to see where to stop. You already have necessary limitations on free speech - death threats, yelling "fire" in a crowded theatre, etc. Using charitable funds to defend people who want to get rid of human rights on the basis of human rights is one of those things that sounds noble, but is ultimately just nonsensical.
They did march with guns.
Glass Shark
Banned
Slippery slope, the thread
In my opinion the ACLU has done far more good than bad, but it's way past time for anyone to attempt to be a true neutral party. Sometimes you have to take a stand for something.
In my opinion the ACLU has done far more good than bad, but it's way past time for anyone to attempt to be a true neutral party. Sometimes you have to take a stand for something.
Mr. Giggles
Member
Heh. I chuckled.
My takeaway was defending violent Nazis in the first place was dumb and there was ample evidence to suggest such before they decided to run someone over.
I guess they just left that their guns at home when they were on campus?
In any case, no one got shot. The outcome would not have changed.
JonnyDBrit
Member
There were a lot of people armed with guns in Charlottesville.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/aug/15/charlottesville-militia-security-gear-uniforms
Police (or was it National Guard) had to basically provide instructions on how to identify someone was actual law enforcement, and not a militia in full gear.
It's not suppose to be noble, it's suppose to be objective. If you start to question what the ACLU should/should not defend then you're inviting your opponents to do the same.
StrategyFan
Member
i don't think the laws in the US care too much about 'responsibility'
aclu leader said:
the ACLU might defend nazi's rights to organize as long as they don't have guns
the 1st amendment hasn't really been updated since the 1700s, so that's what they're working with, whether or not it's morally correct
Primethius
Banned
Part of the criticism towards the ACLU comes from the fact that people do donate to them (as opposed to say, voting for Trump). I suspect that played a part here too, cause I know I cancelled my ACLU membership. And money talks of course.
"To those who support suppressing propaganda they hate, we ask — where do you draw the line?"
Dumb logic is dumb.
You draw the line at the murderous people who want to destroy the things and people you stand for.
Popper once again articulating the ideas I couldn't express.
Though I suspect it's only a vocabulary paradox, not a real, logical paradox. Tolerance and intolerance are probably not the best words to use in this context, and if we insist to use them in this context they may not really be antonyms.
A tolerant approves tolerance and disapprove intolerance.
intolerance is specifically outside of the realm of things tolerance can tolerate.
Or something. I'm not a philosopher.
The ACLU is a private organization and it has no obligation to defend anybody or litigate on anyone's behalf that it doesn't want to.
SecretMoblin
Member
The ACLU is not a charity.
They are also more than willing to point out the many, many times that seemingly reasonable restrictions on speech that the overwhelming majority of the public finds objectionable somehow ends up harming more benign political expression.
BreezyLimbo
Banned
You dont defend the rights of nazis or white supremacists period. Ever. When free speech tolerates the intolerate, the intolerate will take away that free speech when theyre in power.
I think the easiest way to condense the explanation for this argument is essentially "too much of a good thing can be bad for you"."To those who support suppressing propaganda they hate, we ask where do you draw the line?"
Dumb logic is dumb.
You draw the line at the murderous people who want to destroy the things and people you stand for.
Zaraki_Kenpachi
Member
They absolutely did march work guns........ What news coverage have you been watching? Fox news?
That's fine but then don't whine if they don't defend speech that you like due to lack of resources.
Mr_Antimatter
Member
I've heard it praised as "Tolerance is a peace treaty, not a suicide pact".
kamineko
Does his best thinking in the flying car
It's awfully late in the game for you to have a strong opinion about things you haven't looked into
EDIT
OT, good on the CA affiliates
Sweeney Tom
Banned
Proud of the CA chapters
For someone spouting strong opinions about a topic, you are strangely ignorant about important facts about an event that has been covered front to back on all media networks and online.
