Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.

So much for freedom of speech in America!

2

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    turlough wrote:
    Stalin was worse tbh.
    All I know for sure is both have the blood of millions on their hands.

    As for the point about 21st century dictators, Robert Mugabe anyone?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    very true.

    I hate that fucker.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    rickramone wrote:
    Its a pointless exercise trying to justify Stalin being more evil than Hitler - lets move into the 21st century, what about the many evil dictators of the African continent?

    It's estimated 20 million people died under Stalins rule.

    Lets face it, if Hitler didn't suddenly go nuts and invade half of Europe and kill the Jews he'd be looked on as one of the greatest leaders ever. Stalin just pissed on his own people and didn't fuck all for the USSR.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    turlough wrote:
    Lets face it, if Hitler didn't suddenly go nuts and invade half of Europe and kill the Jews he'd be looked on as one of the greatest leaders ever.
    Right, so if he'd just been in charge 1933-1939, everything would have been alright? :rolleyes: Had Hitler have suddenly had to leave his job, I'm sure there would have been plenty of people ready to step in and take over. There was a lot of rivalry in his government, everyone doing favours for the leader...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote:
    Right, so if he'd just been in charge 1933-1939, everything would have been alright? :rolleyes: Had Hitler have suddenly had to leave his job, I'm sure there would have been plenty of people ready to step in and take over. There was a lot of rivalry in his government, everyone doing favours for the leader...

    :yeees:

    You're misunderstanding me...if that wasn't a philosophy of his Nationalist Socialist party they'd be very successful. Of course there'd be more ready to step in.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    turlough wrote:
    You're misunderstanding me...if that wasn't a philosophy of his Nationalist Socialist party they'd be very successful. Of course there'd be more ready to step in.
    The whole point of the Third Reich was that they were going to take over the world and that it would rule the earth for 1000 years. I somehow doubt Hitler was going to turn to Goebbels one day and say, "you know Joseph, I've seen the light. This Nazism is a load of bollocks, isn't it? Fuck it, I'm resigning. I'm gonna spend the rest of my life in Austria walking the dog, cultivating my garden and shagging Eva". :yeees:

    Dictators don't resign! They usually either die in office or are forced out by revolution.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    To name but a few African despots, some dead, some still alive:

    Idi Amin (Uganda)
    Merigistu Haile Mariam (Ethopia)
    Hissine Habre (Chad)
    Daneil Arap Moi (Kenya)
    Foday Sankoh (Sierra Leone)
    Paul Kagame (Rwanda)
    Robert Mugabe (Zimbabwe)
    Isais Afewerki (Eritrea)
    Yoweri Museveni (Uganda)
    Gnasimbe Eyadema (Togo)
    Mobutu Sese Seko (Congo)
    Jean-Badel Bokassa (Central African Republic)

    Good book on the subject: "African Dictators - The logic of tyranny & lessons from history" by Arthur Nwankwo

    For the most part, the major world powers have done very little, or in some cases, nothing, to counter these evil dictators who have impoverished their people and in some cases committed genocide.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote:
    The whole point of the Third Reich was that they were going to take over the world and that it would rule the earth for 1000 years. I somehow doubt Hitler was going to turn to Goebbels one day and say, "you know Joseph, I've seen the light. This Nazism is a load of bollocks, isn't it? Fuck it, I'm resigning. I'm gonna spend the rest of my life in Austria walking the dog, cultivating my garden and shagging Eva". :yeees:

    Dictators don't resign! They usually either die in office or are forced out by revolution.

    What the fuck are you on about? Seriously. Where have I said anything that's contradicted that?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    turlough wrote:
    What the fuck are you on about? Seriously. Where have I said anything that's contradicted that?
    Cast your mind back to what you said a little earlier...
    ...if Hitler didn't suddenly go nuts and invade half of Europe and kill the Jews he'd be looked on as one of the greatest leaders ever...
    Are you saying that Hitler was a sensible, rational dictator until 1939?

    Hitler was a megalomaniac, there's no disputing it.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote:
    Cast your mind back to what you said a little earlier... Are you saying that Hitler was a sensible, rational dictator until 1939?
    Hitler was a megalomaniac, there's no disputing it.

    Nope, not totally. What I'm saying is that if those aims weren't a part of his ideology he would be a very good leader.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    turlough wrote:
    Nope, not totally. What I'm saying is that if those aims weren't a part of his ideology he would be a very good leader.
    What about his theory regarding the Germans being the Master Race, that underpinned most of his political and military thinking?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    rickramone wrote:
    What about his theory regarding the Germans being the Master Race, that underpinned most of his political and military thinking?

    Have you not read what I said? I said if those things weren't part of his ideology he'd be a very successful leader. Stalin was just a cunt. In all respects.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    turlough wrote:
    Have you not read what I said? I said if those things weren't part of his ideology he'd be a very successful leader.
    You're missing the point, they were THE ESSENCE of his beliefs! Take those away and you've got nothing!
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    i decalre Godwin's Law
    close thread


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    NQA wrote:
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/4785574.stm

    So I assume Aladdin you'll be defending the right of this lecturer?
    No, not quite. Mainstream political opinions are quite different from racist twats spreading racist shit that was long time ago discredited as the biggest load of bollocks the world had ever seen.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote:
    About this thread... comparing George W. Bush to Adolf Hitler is utterly bananas. Hitler was responsible for the deaths of millions. This is the man who tried to wipe out a whole race of people. Hitler is the most evil dictator the world has ever known, so to try and compare him with Bush is preposterous. But should the teacher have been sacked? No.
    He didn't compare Bush to Hitler though did he?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Freedom of speech suits most people until they don't like what has been said.
    No, not quite. Freedom of speech suits most people until abusive, racist or homophobic filth is spread.

    A big difference.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    No, not quite. Freedom of speech suits most people until abusive, racist or homophobic filth is spread.

    Or intolerant whining horseshit from a liberal bigot and idiot.

    Same difference.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Are you referring to me klintock? If so, please say it to my face now, instead of doing it behind my back safe in the knowledge I have you on ignore and can't see your posts unless I bother to press the right button.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin wrote:
    No, not quite. Mainstream political opinions are quite different from racist twats spreading racist shit that was long time ago discredited as the biggest load of bollocks the world had ever seen.

    Or to put it another way I agree with the views one and don't agree with the views of the other.

    Freedom of speech and conscience either cover odious opinions (and comparing Bush to Hitler is pretty odious as well in my view) or it's worthless.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Right, let me put it this way: if someone started to say on a daily basis you were a paedophile and raped children in your free time, would you defend their right to say it?

    Or would you take action against them (legal or otherwise)?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Not really, but I'd defend their right to say Catholic Priests who abstain from sex are lmore ikely to be peadophiles.

    If they named an individual Catholic Piest - they'd better have strong evidence...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Yeah ok.

    The bigot it -

    You are a liberal fascist. Your views are obstensibly moderate, but you insistence that everyone holds them, or ones that are so close to them as you can be comfortable with means that you are actually truly intolerant.

    The idiot bit refers to your inability to see that this is the case.

    You have no belief in freedom whatsoever, advocate (state) violence to get your own way and are generally a loon with no morals.

    Did you see that? :wave:
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    klintock wrote:
    Yeah ok.

    The bigot it -

    You are a liberal fascist. Your views are obstensibly moderate, but you insistence that everyone holds them, or ones that are so close to them as you can be comfortable with means that you are actually truly intolerant.

    The idiot bit refers to your inability to see that this is the case.

    You have no belief in freedom whatsoever, advocate (state) violence to get your own way and are generally a loon with no morals.

    Did you see that? :wave:
    You clearly have a perception problem when it comes to abstractism.

    You make things up as you go along or simply misinterpret and twist things to suit your extremely warped world.

    You claim there is 'violence' and 'theft' everywhere where none is to be found.

    You don't even fucking know what a fascist actually is and wouldn't if he came and kicked you in the balls. :rolleyes:

    It is entirely futile to discuss any real world situation with you since not only you claim that there is not such thing as psychological harm (or that it's the victim's 'fault") but you believe such absurdly stupid notions as ''there is nothing wrong in trying to shoot somebody so long as they keep missing the target''.

    In short, you simply are quite, quite mad.

    Now kindly fuck off. :)
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    NQA wrote:
    Or to put it another way I agree with the views one and don't agree with the views of the other.

    Freedom of speech and conscience either cover odious opinions (and comparing Bush to Hitler is pretty odious as well in my view) or it's worthless.


    I don’t think the two cases are that comparable. The teacher said “Sounds a lot like the things that Adolf Hitler used to say, we’re the only ones who are right, everyone else is backward and our job is to conquer the world. Now I'm not saying that Bush and Hitler are exactly the same. Obviously, they're not. But there's some eerie similarities to the tones that they use.", and then invited the class to disagree with him. His students say he’s a teacher given to exaggeration and hyperbole when he tries to stimulate debate and get the class thinking, so in that context I don’t think there’s anything wrong with what he said.

    I think the professor in Leeds has got a right to free speech as well, he’s got a right to give interviews to newspapers to put his view across, he’s got a right to publish his views in books, and he’s got a right to travel to the USA and speak at white supremacist rallies there, and he’s exercised all those rights.

    If, as a consequence of him using his right to free speech, the students of Leeds University decide they no longer wish him to be employed as a professor there, what's so terrible about that?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    NQA wrote:
    Not really, but I'd defend their right to say Catholic Priests who abstain from sex are lmore ikely to be peadophiles.

    If they named an individual Catholic Piest - they'd better have strong evidence...
    Yeah that's fair enough.

    But what difference is there between you objecting to someone claiming you were a child rapist, and people objecting to some other cunt claiming black people are less intelligent or worthy, when it's all a load of bollocks and nothing more than racist rubbish?

    There's no difference in my mind. There is such thing as freedom of expression. But there is also such thing as slander, abusive terms and unnaceptable lies. We can't have it both ways. Either we accept a total freedom of expression where people can call other cunts and rapists and murderers even if it is not true, or we don't accept others saying that people of other races are less worthy when it is not true.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    You clearly have a perception problem when it comes to abstractism.

    Not at all. There are abstractions, and there is the real world. Abstractions aren't real, and the real world, is of course, real. Any basing of a system, be it thought, or actual construction that is based on abstraction over and above reality will be either useless or simply not as good as one that IS based on the real world.

    This is why you onsistently come out with guff, advocate violence against people you don't like and are detached from reality in general. Your probably not a bad person, you just have a very faulty view of the world.
    You claim there is 'violence' and 'theft' everywhere where none is to be found.

    Describe to me a single thing done by the government that isn't either direct violence or paid for by threats of violence. Name a single thing done by the government that isn't paid for by taxation and describe me to the factual differences between theft and taxation.
    You don't even fucking know what a fascist actually is and wouldn't if he came and kicked you in the balls. :rolleyes:

    Unfortunately you always look for content, and disregard process. The process of saying I am right, you are wrong and have no rights is where facsim begins. It's not where it ends, and you probably think it's the specifics of the last fascist regime that was in power somewhere. Because as i said, your kind of stupid.
    It is entirely futile to discuss any real world situation with you since not only you claim that there is not such thing as psychological harm (or that it's the victim's 'fault") but you believe such absurdly stupid notions as ''there is nothing wrong in trying to shoot somebody so long as they keep missing the target''.

    :confused:
    In short, you simply are quite, quite mad.

    As opposed to a pschotic who sees things that aren't there, advocates theft and violence ona daily basis, and places abrstarctions over the real world.

    Well, thanks Freud. :rolleyes:
    Now kindly fuck off. :)

    Hmm so offending people is bad but it's ok if it's you doing it?

    Hypocrite. :D
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin wrote:
    Yeah that's fair enough.

    But what difference is there between you objecting to someone claiming you were a child rapist, and people objecting to some other cunt claiming black people are less intelligent or worthy, when it's all a load of bollocks and nothing more than racist rubbish?

    There's no difference in my mind. There is such thing as freedom of expression. But there is also such thing as slander, abusive terms and unnaceptable lies. We can't have it both ways. Either we accept a total freedom of expression where people can call other cunts and rapists and murderers even if it is not true, or we don't accept others saying that people of other races are less worthy when it is not true.

    There's a difference in my mind between claiming something about a named indivdual and suggesting its a group. Same as I think there's a difference between someone saying that they don't like Blacks and someone saying I don't like them and I'm trying to arrange a lynching party.

    Also where do you stop. I personally find it pretty insulting that virtually everytime Private Eye says 'Ulsterman' it puts 'dour' in front of it. And I'm not a massive fan of some of the comments people make on anyone who joins ther army asbeing either apyschotic or a misfit. But I'm not sure that we should stop people saying this.

    We may think that what people say is odious and wrong, but its a slippery slope when we start stopping them saying it. With slander and incitment to hatred we've already gone someway down that slope (which I'm quiet happy with) I'm not convinced we know to go any further down.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    klintock wrote:
    Or intolerant whining horseshit from a liberal bigot and idiot.

    Same difference.

    freedom of speech never annoys me

    gives me a chance to backchat, and correct them for all their stupid mistakes
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The only response to challenges to freedom of speech is more freedom of speech.
Sign In or Register to comment.