Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The alt right - Mod Warning in OP

Options
1…5657596162…70

Comments

  • Options
    #1742
    PopePalpatine
    Registered Users Posts: 11,884 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    I find it hard to find sympathy for a guy who shat out this:
    C2p852QXUAYiPqM.jpg


  • Options
    #1743
    20Cent
    Registered Users Posts: 8,934 ✭✭✭20Cent


    Mr.Micro wrote: »
    As much as I detest the likes of a white supremacist like Spencer, it was just ugly of that guy to punch him in the face without warning. Such a guy is no better than Spencer.

    The guy punching the nazi is always better than the nazi.


  • Options
    #1744
    Brian?
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,077 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    Mr.Micro wrote: »
    As much as I detest the likes of a white supremacist like Spencer, it was just ugly of that guy to punch him in the face without warning. Such a guy is no better than Spencer.

    We have no idea who the guy punching him was, but I'd put money on it he's a better person than Spencer.

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Options
    #1745
    Mr.Micro
    Registered Users Posts: 5,336 ✭✭✭Mr.Micro


    Brian? wrote: »
    We have no idea who the guy punching him was, but I'd put money on it he's a better person than Spencer.

    No I don't agree. He could have challenged Spencer and then punched him and not do it the underhand way.


  • Options
    #1746
    RDM_83 again
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,116 ✭✭✭RDM_83 again


    Brian? wrote: »
    In Mexico, and the rest of Latin America, people who are descended from Spanish people are considered white. But if they move to the US they become Latino.

    The term "white" is so arbitrary it's almost meaningless. That's why I want a definition of white from these supposed white nationalists. I've yet to get one yet.

    I've the feeling you actually know this already but are using it too make a point that wouldn't work if you couldn't pretend ignorance of it.

    Your statement isn't true, Hispanic is not a racial identity officially, in practice its also not always considered a racial identity, look at George Zimmerman, the media ran with it being a white guy shooting a black kid, Zimmerman was white hispanic though, if it was a racial term they wouldn't have framed it the way they did.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1747
    Brian?
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,077 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    RDM_83 again wrote: »
    I've the feeling you actually know this already but are using it too make a point that wouldn't work if you couldn't pretend ignorance of it.

    Your statement isn't true, Hispanic is not a racial identity officially, in practice its also not always considered a racial identity, look at George Zimmerman, the media ran with it being a white guy shooting a black kid, Zimmerman was white hispanic though, if it was a racial term they wouldn't have framed it the way they did.

    You think I already know the definition of white? I have an idea.

    I'm not the one who supports white nationalism though. I think it's a stupid idea because the term white is so broad.

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Options
    #1748
    RDM_83 again
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,116 ✭✭✭RDM_83 again


    Brian? wrote: »
    You think I already know the definition of white? I have an idea.

    I'm not the one who supports white nationalism though. I think it's a stupid idea because the term white is so broad.


    No I am making the point that its bullsh*t to say that a person thats considered "white" in Mexico moves up North to the USA and is now considered a different race, Hispanic is not a racial category and is clearly framed as different to race in official documents.

    In actuality it also seems to be the case as seen by the coverage of the George Zimmerman incident, where the person of Hispanic/Latino background was considered white.

    Edit: and I don't think you can define white easily at all, there is a interesting early court case about this from the USA where a Brahmin tried to be considered white, had support of "scientific" racists, but got told that race exists in a common understanding way and so he could not be considered white for migration purposes


  • Options
    #1749
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users Posts: 14,368 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    If you have a black great grandfather should you be packing your bags? Or a Mexican granny? A Chinese great great grandmother? Tis a bit confusing this racism lark.


  • Options
    #1750
    FA Hayek
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,084 ✭✭✭FA Hayek


    Brian? wrote: »
    It's mad eh? I've Mexican friends who look nothing like each other at all, one looks remarkable similar to Geronimo. I've a friend who's mother is Mexican and father is of Scottish extraction, but he's Mexican as far as white Americans are concerned. They don't seem to get that Mexican is a nationality not a ethnicity.

    This can also work both ways. Remember the hysteria over George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin? The media and the usual race baiters on the left called him 'white' yet he is a Hispanic himself.

    The media pushed the narrative about white privilege, african american suffering discrimination from white people, yet the man himself was Hispanic. Identity politics in the form pushed by the left have damaged America more so in the long run, in my opinion.


  • Options
    #1751
    FA Hayek
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,084 ✭✭✭FA Hayek


    Brian? wrote: »
    I thought it was free speech to mock whoever we want?

    How do you know the puncher was liberal? He could have been a socialist. Did you happen to note the reaction of the protesters around when it happened. There was no support for the violence.

    It was hilarious though.

    So you find violence to censor free speech hilarious. This ladies and gentlemen is the mask slipping from the usual progressives, they talk a good game about rights, equality, tolerance but when their ideology is threatened they are well able to use violence, more so in fact then the right to get what they want, for the greater good of course for the 'people'.

    The people who punched him were Anti-FA. These left wing extremist groups have in the past murdered and killed scores of people in Europe since WWII. We should not be surprised then that you find that hilarious too?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1752
    20Cent
    Registered Users Posts: 8,934 ✭✭✭20Cent


    FA Hayek wrote: »
    So you find violence to censor free speech hilarious. This ladies and gentlemen is the mask slipping from the usual progressives, they talk a good game about rights, equality, tolerance but when their ideology is threatened they are well able to use violence, more so in fact then the right to get what they want, for the greater good of course for the 'people'.

    The people who punched him were Anti-FA. These left wing extremist groups have in the past murdered and killed scores of people in Europe since WWII. We should not be surprised then that you find that hilarious too?

    The anti fascists killed millions of fascists during WWII fortunately. A chat around the fireplace wouldn't have worked so well.


  • Options
    #1753
    Brian?
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,077 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    FA Hayek wrote: »
    So you find violence to censor free speech hilarious.

    No. I find seeing a horrible neo Nazi being punched in the ear hilarious.
    This ladies and gentlemen is the mask slipping from the usual progressives, they talk a good game about rights, equality, tolerance but when their ideology is threatened they are well able to use violence, more so in fact then the right to get what they want, for the greater good of course for the 'people'.

    The people who punched him were Anti-FA. These left wing extremist groups have in the past murdered and killed scores of people in Europe since WWII. We should not be surprised then that you find that hilarious too?

    So the puncher wasn't a liberal? I'm glad we've cleared that up.

    On a more serious note, this kind of thing does far more damage to the anti fascist agenda than it does good. It's morally reprehensible to use violence to further your agenda, I think we can agree on that.

    Richard Spencer is a horrible man, with horrible ideas. I would much rather see him confronted peacefully and engaged in genuine debate than punched. But that doesn't mean it wasn't funny.

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Options
    #1754
    FA Hayek
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,084 ✭✭✭FA Hayek


    Brian? wrote: »
    No. I find seeing a horrible neo Nazi being punched in the ear hilarious.

    If you find an individual punching someone else on TV hilarious then yes, you do condone it. You are shifting your moral stance based primarily on ideology, which is quite extremist actually.


  • Options
    #1755
    Palmach
    Registered Users Posts: 978 ✭✭✭Palmach


    20Cent wrote: »
    The guy punching the nazi is always better than the nazi.

    Those who use violence to further their aims are the same as Nazis.


  • Options
    #1756
    Brian?
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,077 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    FA Hayek wrote: »
    If you find an individual punching someone else on TV hilarious then yes, you do condone it. You are shifting your moral stance based primarily on ideology, which is quite extremist actually.

    Who said I wasn't extremist?

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Options
    #1757
    InTheTrees
    Registered Users Posts: 9,900 ✭✭✭InTheTrees


    Brian? wrote: »
    Who said I wasn't extremist?

    Agreed. When it comes to opposing nazis and hate then I'm an extremist too.


  • Options
    #1758
    HivemindXX
    Registered Users Posts: 1,208 ✭✭✭HivemindXX


    Palmach wrote: »
    Those who use violence to further their aims are the same as Nazis.

    No. Not even close to accurate.

    I don't agree with using violence to achieve your goals but doing so does not automatically put you on a par with the disgusting vermin that are neo-nazis.

    You are either terribly ignorant of the facts or are cynically trying to create the impression that they are all as bad as each other.


  • Options
    #1759
    InTheTrees
    Registered Users Posts: 9,900 ✭✭✭InTheTrees


    HivemindXX wrote: »
    Palmach wrote: »
    Those who use violence to further their aims are the same as Nazis.

    No. Not even close to accurate.

    I don't agree with using violence to achieve your goals but doing so does not automatically put you on a par with the disgusting vermin that are neo-nazis.

    You are either terribly ignorant of the facts or are cynically trying to create the impression that they are all as bad as each other.

    Responding to a bully doesn't make one the same.


  • Options
    #1760
    Tony EH
    Registered Users Posts: 19,115 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    FA Hayek wrote: »
    So you find violence to censor free speech hilarious. This ladies and gentlemen is the mask slipping from the usual progressives, they talk a good game about rights, equality, tolerance but when their ideology is threatened they are well able to use violence, more so in fact then the right to get what they want, for the greater good of course for the 'people'.

    Nobody is saying they support "violence to censor free speech", however, when someone is an advocate of the following:
    ...we should instead be asking questions like, ‘Does human civilization actually need the Black race?’ ‘Is Black genocide right?’ and, if it is, ‘What would be the best and easiest way to dispose of them?’

    Then a punch in the face is the least that they can expect. Spencer is free to support such crap, but he shouldn't be surprised when he gets a dig in ear.

    That's the price of some "free speech".

    Plus free speech doesn't mean tollerating such racist remarks as the above. People can be free to say such ****e, but they better be prepared for the consequences of their speech.

    I believe free speech to be absolute. You're either for it, or you're not. But, I also believe in people taking RESPONSIBILITY for what they say. Spouting stuff like "What would be the best and easiest way to dispose of them?" and getting, at the very least, a smack is ENTIRELY the problem of the speaker and it serves them right.

    Lastly, if you and you're like are supportive of this odious worm, you need a long hard look at yourself.


  • Options
    #1761
    red ears
    Closed Accounts Posts: 945 ✭✭✭red ears


    Mr.Micro wrote: »
    No I don't agree. He could have challenged Spencer and then punched him and not do it the underhand way.

    He should have squared up to him, punched him and stood his ground if he was intent on violence. What he did was cowardly sucker-punching a man on the side of the head while being interviewed and then running off. I thinks its a bad development though, how can the people cheering Spencer being punched complain when one of Spencer's people punch someone whose politics they disagree with.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1762
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,795 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    I thought Warren Ellis's take on it was interesting:
    ...yes, it is always correct to punch Nazis. They lost the right to not be punched in the face when they started spouting genocidal ideologies that in living memory killed millions upon millions of people.

    [...]

    Nazis need a punch in the face.


  • Options
    #1763
    red ears
    Closed Accounts Posts: 945 ✭✭✭red ears


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    I thought Warren Ellis's take on it was interesting:

    Its giving the green light to political violence. And that can work both ways. Its a really foolish position to take.


  • Options
    #1764
    Jan_de_Bakker
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,403 ✭✭✭Jan_de_Bakker


    Brian? wrote: »
    I thought it was free speech to mock whoever we want?

    How do you know the puncher was liberal? He could have been a socialist. Did you happen to note the reaction of the protesters around when it happened. There was no support for the violence.

    It was hilarious though.

    Really !

    You find someone getting assaulted like that hilarious ??

    wow ..


  • Options
    #1765
    FreudianSlippers
    Registered Users Posts: 20,397 ✭✭✭✭FreudianSlippers


    Jan_de_Bakker wrote: »
    Really !

    You find someone getting assaulted like that hilarious ??

    wow ..

    Given it took place in the United States, it was battery not assault.


    :pac:


  • Options
    #1766
    red ears
    Closed Accounts Posts: 945 ✭✭✭red ears


    There was a guy shot in the stomach at a Milo event over the weekend. The shooter thought he was a racist. More political violence. I'm sure that was acceptable too, maybe even funny.


  • Options
    #1767
    FA Hayek
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,084 ✭✭✭FA Hayek


    Brian? wrote: »
    Who said I wasn't extremist?

    No one. We are all well aware of your extremist left wing views, views that manifest itself to excuse violence perpetrated in the name of 'a cause'. Ireland has seen plenty of that over the past 40 years or so. At least you admit you are not a liberal anyway, a true liberal condemns violence, leftists on the other hand are knee deep in violence.


  • Options
    #1768
    marienbad
    Registered Users Posts: 9,463 ✭✭✭marienbad


    FA Hayek wrote: »
    leftists on the other hand are knee deep in violence.

    as are rightists , meaningless generalisations (as usual)


  • Options
    #1769
    FA Hayek
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,084 ✭✭✭FA Hayek


    Tony EH wrote: »

    That's the price of some "free speech".

    Plus free speech doesn't mean tollerating such racist remarks as the above. People can be free to say such ****e, but they better be prepared for the consequences of their speech.

    That is just authoritarian totalitarian garbage.

    Say the wrong thing and you can expect violence. Tell me, if the person was advocating free college tuition would you be saying the same thing?

    The problem with your point of view is that you decide who can have rights and who cannot. The mark of someone who supports freedom of speech is not allowing things to be said they agree with, but allowing things to be said they do not agree with. People who claim to be liberals are not, they are in fact il-liberal.


  • Options
    #1770
    FreudianSlippers
    Registered Users Posts: 20,397 ✭✭✭✭FreudianSlippers


    Although I'm not suggesting the guy did anything that would fall under one of the exceptions, it appears to me at least generally that people are under the mistaken belief that free speech is an absolute right which it is not.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1771
    Tony EH
    Registered Users Posts: 19,115 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    FA Hayek wrote: »
    That is just authoritarian totalitarian garbage.

    Bullshit.
    FA Hayek wrote: »
    Say the wrong thing and you can expect violence. Tell me, if the person was advocating free college tuition would you be saying the same thing?

    If you can't see that saying:
    ...we should instead be asking questions like, ‘Does human civilization actually need the Black race?’ ‘Is Black genocide right?’ and, if it is, ‘What would be the best and easiest way to dispose of them?’

    ...is saying the "wrong thing". We have nothing else to talk about.
    FA Hayek wrote: »
    The problem with your point of view is that you decide who can have rights and who cannot. The mark of someone who supports freedom of speech is not allowing things to be said they agree with, but allowing things to be said they do not agree with. People who claim to be liberals are not, they are in fact il-liberal.

    You've missed the point completely.

    I am for freedom of speech as an absolute. I fully believe in Chomsky's point of view that one is either for freedom of speech or they're not.

    However, what someone says is THEIR OWN RESPONSIBILITY and if they get a punch in face for patently abhorrent views, the fault lies on their own doorstep.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement