Why hate speech isn’t free speech, in a nutshell

hate-speech-consequences.jpg

This is where hate speech invariably, inevitably leads: innocent people maimed and killed in bomb blasts.

Does it look like freedom to you?

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail
This entry was posted in Angry Pacifist Speaks Her Mind, Fascism Without Swastikas, Newspeak is Nospeak, Not So Compassionate Conservatism. Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Why hate speech isn’t free speech, in a nutshell

  1. jakob ismaeli says:

    surprise not to se you blog abut the venezuelan bozxer. The US should let have into the US. Poor guy is not his fault to tatoo chavez on chest.

  2. Jakob, I’m going to. I saw some pretty disgusting headlines in the Miami media today about the whole thing. Apparently they’re trying to make him into some kind of example of how Chavistas are all thugs. Stupid. I suspect he’s actually the victim of boxing-related brain damage, since violence and drinking problems are often connected to repeated head injuries, and boxers sustain a lot of hits to the head.
    Anyhow, hang in there–I should have something up shortly!

  3. Slave Revolt says:

    I concur with the sentiments, but let’s not forget the terrorism supported by progressive liberals in capitalist societies. Most don’t take to the streets when the empire and it’s minions routinely attack weak nations.
    Tim learned hate from the pro’s, the ruling classes and it’s base in the managerial class. But Tim wasn’t supposed to attack the domestic population, only the amorphous foriegn, brown-folk that get in the way of Corporate profits.

  4. Jim Hadstate says:

    Well, ‘Bina, according to Rush Limbaugh’s theory of the transmitted responsibility of liberals for wingnut hate speech you have now become responsible for any wingnut sicko blowing up anything. I guess that Obama’s off the hook for now.
    I can never look at that picture with out a lump in my throat, because if I remember correctly that child was dead or died shortly thereafter. There is a special place in Hell for the sicko’s who do things like this. And I think God really resents it when they do it in Her name. (I LOVE using the feminine for God. It drives the christofascists nuts)

  5. John Josephs says:

    How does free speech or even hate speech end up with people dying. It is [i]speech[/i], not actions.

  6. John Josephs says:

    Just as an addition, the proper position in reference to that picture would be the Right’s anti-government one, as governments tend to be the ones who lead us into wars and who cause bomb blasts that kill innocent people.

  7. Wrong, and again wrong. The right’s anti-government stance IS what killed that innocent child. The government did not bomb the Murrah building and the day-care centre in it; an anti-government wingnut who had absorbed a shit-ton of Nazi rhetoric over the course of a few years did. It was the rhetoric, combined with his existing terrorist training in the military, that enabled him to do what he did. McVeigh got his explosives training from the US army, and his ideology from The Turner Diaries, the neo-Nazis and the Aryan Nations and KKK. The fact that their “speech” is wrongly protected, while at the same time leftist speech is suppressed in the US, is what enables terrorism. Germany outlawed Nazism, which is why Germany has less of a domestic terror problem today. Nazi speech is not protected there; ordinary citizens are.
    And if McVeigh were really concerned with the evils of foreign wars, he would have come out of Gulf War I a peacenik, like so many Vietnam vets did, instead of an angry asshole who hated taxes, hated integration, and saw dead kids as just “collateral damage”.
    I suppose you’ve never met the kind of people who read The Turner Diaries. They tend not to remain peaceful for long. Their minds get warped and twisted, and yes, that book is a brainwashing agent. Free speech stops where brainwashing begins.
    If you can’t follow that very straight line, then you have a problem with reading comprehension.

  8. Slave Revolt says:

    Well said, Bina.
    The “no connection between speach and actions” argument doesn’t fly.
    This was a rightwing terrorist attack, the ideologies and warped ethics of these men are an extreme manifestation if the right political tendency.

Comments are closed.