Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

easybronc

Free speech rally shut down in Boston

Recommended Posts

My biggest concern is that is our own people leading the slow destruction of our First Amendment rights?  Where we can enjoy freedom of speech without the fear of violent reprisals?

I don't disagree with having the need to squash that type of racist talk as soon as it happens (and as long as it is non-violent) but I sure hope we are not going down a slippery slope.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In this instance it seems things were done correctly. The government did all it could to protect the rally, but there was just too much potential for violence to reasonably allow it to go as planned. No fault on the government's part. They protected free speech up to the edge of where things would have spiraled into chaotic violence. Props to the police.

Its when the government tells the police to stand down that free speech ends. It's not a slippery slope, it just ends. The government's primary responsibility is to protect the free exchange of ideas. They did all they reasonably could to do that today. When they stop, when they stand down, free speech ends. There is no slope, it's a cliff.

We’re all sitting in the dugout. Thinking we should pitch. How you gonna throw a shutout when all you do is bitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Jalapeno said:

My biggest concern is that is our own people leading the slow destruction of our First Amendment rights?  Where we can enjoy freedom of speech without the fear of violent reprisals?

I don't disagree with having the need to squash that type of racist talk as soon as it happens (and as long as it is non-violent) but I sure hope we are not going down a slippery slope.

The danger to free speech is not the counter protest and violence.   People still have plenty of ways to communicate.  None of the protestors are actively shutting down their internet connections or ability to print material.

The real danger is the practice of Doxxing where they identify individuals to their workplace and get them fired.  The primary means of limiting free speech is no longer via the government.  It's via corporations and depriving these individuals of a way to make a living.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, sactowndog said:

The danger to free speech is not the counter protest and violence.   People still have plenty of ways to communicate.  None of the protestors are actively shutting down their internet connections or ability to print material.

The real danger is the practice of Doxxing where they identify individuals to their workplace and get them fired.  The primary means of limiting free speech is no longer via the government.  It's via corporations and depriving these individuals of a way to make a living.   

Meh. Free speech can have consequences. You get ID'd as a Nazi and you'll likely get fired from your government job too. As you should. 

Thay Haif Said: Quhat Say Thay? Lat Thame Say

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Old_SD_Dude said:

Meh. Free speech can have consequences. You get ID'd as a Nazi and you'll likely get fired from your government job too. As you should. 

Yeah except it's then it's not free.  People have to pay a dear price...  very close to the same as being jailed.   Which is also a consequence.  

The whole point of the bill of rights is to protect people from the tyranny of the majority.  Hardly a protection when the majority can deprive you of the ability to make a living.   

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Old_SD_Dude said:

We've seen the ultimate ramifications of Nazi ideology. If we had a President who provided moral leadership, then maybe corporations wouldn't have to. 

Well now that Rosewell is gone, I'm pretty sure no one is supporting Nazi ideology.

CEO's can still speak out against it.

CEO's/Business Owners can still say such beliefs are not condoned in this company and if I get a whiff of you acting out on those beliefs in the course of your job duties your fired.   

But they should not be allowed to fire/blackball an employee (who isn't the face of the company) because of beliefs held and expressed out of the workplace environment.  In other words being the vehicle for the majority to punish a minority.  At the point that occurs free speech dies.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, sactowndog said:

The real danger is the practice of Doxxing where they identify individuals to their workplace and get them fired.  The primary means of limiting free speech is no longer via the government.  It's via corporations and depriving these individuals of a way to make a living.   

I think that's a situation where free speech is protected, but you aren't protected from the consequences of exercising that free speech. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, retrofade said:

I think that's a situation where free speech is protected, but you aren't protected from the consequences of exercising that free speech. 

@sactowndog seems to advocate for a form of "free speech anarchy" in which there are no consequences for ones actions. 

That's certainly NOT what our constitution protects. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is not a Nazi or white supremacist group.  From the article:

Organizers of the "free speech" event had publicly distanced themselves from the neo-Nazis, white supremacists and others who fomented violence in Charlottesville on Aug. 12. 

John Medlar of the Boston Free Speech Coalition, which organized the event, is a 23-year-old student at Fitchburg State College. He told CBS News correspondent DeMarco Morgan that his group would not tolerate hate speech.

"Reasonable people on both sides who are tolerant enough to not resort to violence when they hear something they disagree with, reasonable people who are actually willing to listen to each other, need to come together and start promoting that instead of letting all of these fringe groups on the left and the right determine what we can and cannot say," Medlar said.

       

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, sactowndog said:

Yeah except it's then it's not free.  People have to pay a dear price...  very close to the same as being jailed.   Which is also a consequence.  

The whole point of the bill of rights is to protect people from the tyranny of the majority.  Hardly a protection when the majority can deprive you of the ability to make a living.   

 

The point of the bill of rights was to protect individuals from the tyranny of the government.

Freedom has consequences. If you deny the right of businesses to run the way they want, you aren't removing the consequences at all. You are shifting them from those responsible for their actions to third parties who said or did nothing, yet now have to bear consequences. 

We’re all sitting in the dugout. Thinking we should pitch. How you gonna throw a shutout when all you do is bitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It all depends upon what one considers "Nazi". The left uses the term generally against conservatives. So. in the context of 21st century America, with left wing ignorance not only accepted but encouraged, this is really nothing more than the left using violence to shut down the conservative voice.

This, I can assure you, will not end well for the left.

“Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts.”

-Richard Feynman

"When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators."

-P.J. O’Rourke

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, SDSUfan said:

It all depends upon what one considers "Nazi". The left uses the term generally against conservatives. So. in the context of 21st century America, with left wing ignorance not only accepted but encouraged, this is really nothing more than the left using violence to shut down the conservative voice.

This, I can assure you, will not end well for the left.

No, the term Nazi generally refers to, y'know.... Nazis. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, retrofade said:

No, the term Nazi generally refers to, y'know.... Nazis. 

Well yes, but the term Nazi is thrown around like candy.  You voted Trump?  You're a Nazi!  You're a member of the GOP?  Nazi!  When you call everybody/everything a Nazi, the term loses its meaning.  Shit, I got called a Nazi sympathizer on Twitter for saying that Student from Nevada shouldn't be expelled unless it is proven he committed a crime.  I support his right to be stupid, despite vehemently disagreeing with his positions.  

thelawlorfaithful, on 31 Dec 2012 - 04:01 AM, said:One of the rules I live by: never underestimate a man in a dandy looking sweater

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, easybronc said:

Its not safe to be a conservative in Boston.    Surreal, I almost couldn't believe this story.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/boston-free-speech-rally-thousands-take-to-the-streets-in-rival-protests-live-updates/

 

 

Bronc, why did you find it necessary to use a Fox News type headline? Even the article you posted says the Free Speech rally "ended", no one forced it to "shut down".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, mugtang said:

Well yes, but the term Nazi is thrown around like candy.  You voted Trump?  You're a Nazi!  You're a member of the GOP?  Nazi!  When you call everybody/everything a Nazi, the term loses its meaning.  Shit, I got called a Nazi sympathizer on Twitter for saying that Student from Nevada shouldn't be expelled unless it is proven he committed a crime.  I support his right to be stupid, despite vehemently disagreeing with his positions.  

I guess I haven't seen that... though the characterization of Democrats as being "commies" is pretty common, so I guess the Nazi comparison is probably legitimate. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, SDSUfan said:

It all depends upon what one considers "Nazi". The left uses the term generally against conservatives. So. in the context of 21st century America, with left wing ignorance not only accepted but encouraged, this is really nothing more than the left using violence to shut down the conservative voice.

This, I can assure you, will not end well for the left.

 Notwithstanding the fake news from Nacho Duce, we can all agree that the alt-right protesters in Charlottesville were Nazis/white supremacists/KKK no?

Thay Haif Said: Quhat Say Thay? Lat Thame Say

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, retrofade said:

I guess I haven't seen that... though the characterization of Democrats as being "commies" is pretty common, so I guess the Nazi comparison is probably legitimate. 

And I wish people on the right would stop that shit too.  

thelawlorfaithful, on 31 Dec 2012 - 04:01 AM, said:One of the rules I live by: never underestimate a man in a dandy looking sweater

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...