POLL - Hate speech as a tolerable subject matter to be hosted by the P&R

[Geosurface]

It all stems from white guilt.

Pretty much. I just wonder when white guilt will finally be satiated?

For some time now, decades, it seems like white guilt has fueled policy on education, immigration, aid to the third world, and motivates many actions by individual whites and collectively white groups, governments, etc...

The mentality seems pretty clearly to be:

- Whites shouldn't have any lands to themselves, that'd be racist. Everyone else should though, that's good preservation of diversity.

- Whites shouldn't ever talk about race, other than perhaps to praise other groups. Everyone else is allowed to though. The exact same concerns about problems in the black community when expressed by someone black are insightful, sobering, and worth consideration. If they come out of a white mouth instead, they are hate speech, supremacism, and racist.

- Whites aren't allowed ethnic awareness or pride. Well, they can be aware of how evil their race is and how much they have to atone for. That's about it. Ethnic awareness and pride and activism on behalf of racial interests by blacks, Hispanics, and anyone else who isn't white, is not only acceptable but understandable, necessary, and to be encouraged.

- There should be government policies specifically designed to limit the number of whites getting admission to universities, or hired for jobs. We want "diversity" and "diversity" means everyone who isn't white. Especially those nasty white males, yuck.

 

[Doppel]

I abstain. I don't like either option because there is no middle-ground.

Certainly zero-tolerance to describe any racial supremacy seems absurd to me. We know races are different and there's absolutely no evidence whatsoever to presume that despite these differences no race is superior to another in certain environments and at certain times.

And yet to choose the undeterred option it seems I'm condoning an individual ranting thread after thread about whatever racial issue is the prime motivation of his life.

 

[Agent11]

I was born in 82. I did not experience the civil rights movement, it was all history to me.

I was raised in a liberal family and was taught equality. I have no white guilt what so ever.

That all men should have equal protection and rights under the law is a given, no reasonable person should even debate this.

However, there is strong statistical evidence of racial trends in data. Should this be ignored in the name of equality? Or should it be discussed and solutions found that honor the rights of all involved?

 

[Geosurface]

I was born in 82. I did not experience the civil rights movement, it was all history to me.

I was raised in a liberal family and was taught equality. I have no white guilt what so ever.

That all men should have equal protection and rights under the law is a given, no reasonable person should even debate this.

However, there is strong statistical evidence of racial trends in data. Should this be ignored in the name of equality? Or should it be discussed and solutions found that honor the rights of all involved?

Agreed completely with the bolded.

I too was raised in a liberal family btw. I was raised to worship JFK and MLK.

I have only within the last year or so started to question some of the mindless egalitarian dogma. I don't hate anyone, but I do value western civilization and want it to be preserved.

I also have seen evidence of racial differences that is simply undeniable. I'm addicted to the truth and sometimes this gets me in trouble. It would be a lot easier to go back to my former blindness. It ruffled zero feathers.

 

[irishScott]

This is an internet forum. I say let the hate speech, of whatever variety flow and that way those of us with brains will know who not to listen to.

 

[DominionSeraph]

If we got rid of it my signature would make no sense.

 

[drebo]

Agreed completely with the bolded.

I too was raised in a liberal family btw. I was raised to worship JFK and MLK.

I have only within the last year or so started to question some of the mindless egalitarian dogma. I don't hate anyone, but I do value western civilization and want it to be preserved.

I also have seen evidence of racial differences that is simply undeniable. I'm addicted to the truth and sometimes this gets me in trouble. It would be a lot easier to go back to my former blindness. It ruffled zero feathers.

I was raised in a very conservative home and raised to be Catholic.

That said, I was also raised to use my brain to think for myself and not blindly accept what others preach, in every respect.

To ignore that there are differences not only between the different races/cultures, but also within different races is to be wilfully ignorant. To force equality on everyone just because it makes you feel good does only harm. Equality through mediocrity is bad policy. That No Child Left Behind failed so miserably and that even blacks are calling for an end to Affirmative Action should put the lie to egalitarian policies for everyone to see.

Only white guilt keeps those policies going. Any rational person can see that they don't work.

 

[OCNewbie]

What is P&R?

 

[DominionSeraph]

What is P&R?

Politics and Racism.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

Not voting in this poll, nor commenting on this specific issue, but I'll make a few points that everyone can consider or ignore as they will.

First, nobody needs free speech to protect the right to say "You're a fine looking fellow". The real test is if you are willing, even eager, to protect the right of someone you dislike to say something you find offensive.

Second, drawing a hard line between comments that raise legitimate issues about race, and those intended to just be derogatory, is impossible. It is inherently a judgment call.

Third, unsupported opinions are meaningless. Everyone has them, and nobody really cares about anyone else's. Informed opinions -- those with facts and reasoning behind them -- are meaningful, and potentially the basis of a good discussion.

Fourth, the more outlandish or accusatory an opinion, the stronger the evidence and reasoning must be for it to be considered an informed opinion rather than just a meaningless personal feeling.

 

[StrangerGuy]

This is a political extremist calling everyone else who disagrees with his opinion extremists.

LOLOLOLOLOLOL

Remember kids, calling out bullshit done by a race or a religion is now extremist.

 

[monovillage]

/sarc on
It would be cool if anyone saying anything rude about baby Jesus, or creationism or abortion or priests and kids or public prayer or gay rights would be perma banned for hate speech against Christianity.
/sarc off

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Under Apartheid, 73 people died in police detention from 1963 to 1990, which equates to 2.6 people per year during the Apartheid period.

How is that in any way a racist comment? Is it incorrect?

 

[drebo]

/sarc on
It would be cool if anyone saying anything rude about baby Jesus, or creationism or abortion or priests and kids or public prayer or gay rights would be perma banned for hate speech against Christianity.
/sarc off

No such thing, because Christians are predominantly western caucasians. Impossible to have hate speech against them.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

/sarc on
It would be cool if anyone saying anything rude about baby Jesus, or creationism or abortion or priests and kids or public prayer or gay rights would be perma banned for hate speech against Christianity.
/sarc off

tbh I see far many more people blame Islam for everything than Christianity. You may get the occasional "Christians are the reason we couldn't have nice things for 1000 years"-type post, but not really anything that resembles hate speech. In fact, I recall an amdhunter thread where he made a relatively silly criticism of Christianity and it was locked and he was threatened with a ban for hate speech.

 

[monovillage]

tbh I see far many more people blame Islam for everything than Christianity. You may get the occasional "Christians are the reason we couldn't have nice things for 1000 years"-type post, but not really anything that resembles hate speech. In fact, I recall an amdhunter thread where he made a relatively silly criticism of Christianity and it was locked and he was threatened with a ban for hate speech.

You could be right, but usually one persons hero is another persons troll.

 

[Geosurface]

One of the things I've found most remarkable over the last year or so is that after spending my entire life as not just a liberal egalitarian, but a hard core one... even just the slightest straying outside of those bounds is enough to get you shouted down as a racist. Not just on these boards here but I've experienced this elsewhere too.

I went from being someone who was an Obama voter, caucuser, and donater, had worked on several leftist causes for Ralph Nader, environmental causes, anti-war protests, anti-death penalty protests, etc... to someone who my former fellow liberals are prepared to shout down as a "racist!" "stormfront lover!" "genocide supporter!" "bigot!" "eugenicist!" etc etc... in such a short period of time.

Ironically it is precisely this which lead me down the path of investigating, and then inevitably giving credence to, even more stuff related to racial differences, etc.

How so? Well, the first cries of "racist!" I was getting were when I was discussing the Trayvon Martin case, and those accusations came AT A TIME WHEN I WAS IN NO WAY SHAPE OR FORM RACIST! This made me curious. I felt like I'd unearthed some vein running through conversation and society... what was this? What was this incredible taboo? How could someone like I was, a die hard liberal with black friends, who was immensely proud of voting for our first black president, etc... suddenly be getting called racist? It fascinated me.

I have always been drawn to taboos, and I couldn't ignore this one now. I dug and dug, and entertained arguments I had never given a glance before. I found that there was more scientific, logical thought, evidence and rationality in the supposed, so called "racist" world than I ever dreamed there might be. There were certainly also some opinions and manners of expressing opinions I still found very vile and distasteful, but it was not all so easily dismissed as I had always thought. I used to dismiss any sort of acknowledgement of racial differences, etc in exactly the way I've had it dismissed now myself. As ignorance, bigotry, blind hatred... etc.

The difference is, I never supported shouting people down or silencing them back then.

Sometimes when you see that there are certain things people don't want others to be allowed to talk about, some people, like myself, are even more drawn to them. Drawn to find out more, find out if there might just be something to them.

A lot of people won't believe me, but I really did register here as a liberal, racial-egalitarian with every intention of casting a second vote for Obama. I would caution those who shout "racist!" at the slightest reason, or even with no reason... that you just may be triggering others like I was to raise their curiosity and find out just what is behind this taboo and whether there's anything to it. Sometimes that raving anti-free speech attitude can really backfire.

I am encouraged though to see that despite really slanted, poor wording of this poll and despite being pretty sure I saw something when I voted about "votes will be visible to all" (very Orwellian) that free speech is still winning against censorship, at least currently. The board should be proud of that.

And one final thing, since the OP seems to use me as his favorite example of "teh raciss!" - I have always said that I think there are all types of people in all racial groups, there are brilliant, amazing, wonderful, kind black people who are far smarter than myself and are contributing to important scientific and social fields... there are white, criminalistic pieces of shit who I wouldn't shed a tear for if they got blown away by the cops... I have never advocated that anyone be treated differently in the eyes of the law or anyone be harmed...

I've merely sought the truth of these things, and tried to discuss it. Perhaps sometimes my wording could have been much better. But a warning to any current liberals who go digging like I did: the full force of the leftist, politically correct thought police gestapo will fall on you like a ton of bricks. If you're like me, that realization alone will ENSURE that you do go digging. I envy those who aren't as drawn to controversy as myself.

 

[Greenman]

OP, you need to proof read what you've written before you post.

 

[Whiskey16]

If the first quote was hate speech, wouldn't it have lacked the stipulation about first/second generation?
..

Yet here you are, still quoting the old unedited post...

A post hosted, present, and unaltered for over three months is fair game for a citation. Making a revision to a post so many months later may not be used to invalidate arguments against the original content.

I will re-enforce my position that discussion is too far off the deep end in welcoming and hosting extremism. Incitement to violence is a criminal act in many jurisdictions:

By killing them wouldn't we actually be doing them and ourselves a massive favor? We'd be sending them to glorious paradise with Allah and possibly 72 virgins depending on the exact circumstances of their death... and we'd be leaving the mortal world to us infidel scum who really don't deserve heaven and won't go there anyway right?

Seems like a win win.

Exactly. The upper hand will be gained by them [Muslim immigrant population] in the near future if through no other means, then through birth rate alone.

So this is why I say, violence may be the only answer.

I know it seems harsh, but I truly believe the choice is between doing some really, really distasteful shit (killing lots, and lots of people) or watching European civilization, culture, and tradition be utterly wiped out or nearly so.

To me, the killing sounds better.

• Is this P&N sub-forum fostering the manifestation of another Anders Breivik?
• How about the wistful longing for the whitewashed days of Apartheid South Africa by one posting under an avatar of the former South African flag emblazoned with the caption, "Miss us yet?"
• Or how about this current gem of a thread attempting to marginalise blacks and make a eugenics arguments of race based quotas for immigration:

But if some groups produce certain problematic types of people at a far higher rate than other groups do, or other types of very desirable (for civilization) people at a much lower rate... should this have implications for say, immigration policy?

The tripartite of hate and supremacist extremism is presently welcomed:

1. False presentations to praise the glories of a racist and Apartheid state.
2. Psuedoscience and prejudice to marginalise targeted racial/ethnic/religious groups while promoting the supremacy of another.
3. Open calls for generalised detention and expulsion of a targeted group in combination to advocate the extermination of the remainder.

It would also be unwise to neglect a mention that this current violent and hateful environment has provided fertile ground for direct death threats against present forum members.

For those voting for the second option, you are choosing association and continued hosting for such content.

These are not just warning signs. By such content that is being welcomed and hosted, what other actions are being encouraged into the greater society?

At what point must responsibility come to be?

 

[Dr. Zaus]

Who the are you, OP, to tell me that something is "hate speech?"

Clearly you're talking about Geo's post; and while his assumptions about the information are wrong, it isn't "hate speech" to have such an opinion.

Should we allow "kill them" X and the like; fuck no. But repressing someone's ideas, particularly because the evidence they present offends you, is not fucking hate speech: it's just you not knowing how to defend your own thoughts.

 

[Geosurface]

For those voting for the second option, you are choosing association and continued hosting for such content.

These are not just warning signs. By such content that is being welcomed and hosted, what other actions are being encouraged into the greater society?

At what point must responsibility come to be?

Your threats and absurd comparisons to Anders Brevik etc, and constant repetition of the same basic "this site is going to be in big trouble if I don't get my way!" mantra, reveal you to be a very sad individual indeed.

I'm curious, if you were in charge of your own country, what would the laws be related to freedom of speech and of the press?

You don't seem to value the right of people to express unpopular opinions at all. You seem like a terrified individual who refuses to engage anyone in a discussion, but rather just attempts to frighten them into silence and silencing others for you.

Armed with your poll results, and the apparent lack of sympathetic ears in the moderators here since you haven't gotten your way... why continue to use these forums? They clearly are a constant source of dismay for you.

 

[Whiskey16]

Armed with your poll results, and the apparent lack of sympathetic ears in the moderators here since you haven't gotten your way... why continue to use these forums? They clearly are a constant source of dismay for you.

If this society represents itself to be akin to Stormfront and various white power brotherhoods then it may be recognised as such.

If a members acts out their expressed desires to commit hate crimes and the wider world gains knowledge of potential sourcing, then there are certain repercussions.

The poll is of a social and political side interest alone. This site is a private entity made public and the owners and moderation may choose what they wish.

 

[Whiskey16]

Who the are you, OP, to tell me that something is "hate speech?"

Clearly you're talking about Geo's post; and while his assumptions about the information are wrong, it isn't "hate speech" to have such an opinion.

It is unfortunate that even with the provided examples that you are incapable of discerning what is defiling hate speech against a stated racial/ethnic/religious group and what is not.

😕 You may be a proponent of all such vile content.

It is unfortunate that others fail to concern themselves with the potentially great costs involved by welcoming, hosting, and fostering such explicit subject matter.

Some price that has already been paid -- against the decorum and civility of this society. An uncivil and disproportionate imbalance away from the real world is created. The P&N is less attractive to the broader and civilised society while becoming more attractive and welcoming to an extremist (some violent) fringe.

 

[Geosurface]

If this society represents itself to be akin to Stormfront and various white power brotherhoods then it may be recognised as such.

What in God's name do people who quote mainstream scientific findings to demonstrate factual racial differences (which include east Asians and Ashkenazi Jews scoring significantly higher than whites on IQ and having lower crime rates than whites) have to do with white power and Stormfront?

 

[Sonikku]

It's not hate speech. It's doing our sacred duty to protect ourselves from the non-white foreign hordes.

Fucking Indian Chiefs need to go back to India where they belong.