That is offensive. I'm a European 1st Amendment absolutist. That said, people here wouldn't know what liberty is if it hit them on the head, despite constantly talking about how "we live in a free country".
Disagree, some agitation is so harmful it needs to be legally prosecuted, specifically the kind that is capable of destroying the other freedoms of the society.
Specifically public fomentation of resentment. If every person who ever publicly asked the question "why are there so many blacks in prison?" or "why are women paid less than men?" was arrested, spent the night in jail, and was charged a hefty fine the world would be a better place.
You can't defeat marxism under a liberal framework, if you could then we wouldn't be in this mess.
If every person who ever publicly asked the question "why are there so many blacks in prison?"
So.. if I want to invoke this as an indication there's something wrong inside the "black community" then I should go to jail? If I use it as a defense in an argument as to why I don't "default trust" black people? Jail?
was arrested, spent the night in jail, and was charged a hefty fine the world would be a better place.
Is that like your biggest fear.. spending a night in jail? What do you think happens in jail?
You can't defeat marxism under a liberal framework
"You have to remove liberty to fight those who would remove liberty from you."
I think the implication he's making is that a benevolent dictatorship would be more effective than a corrupt democracy – which is probably true, but only if you're making the assumption that the dictatorship will continue to support your interests in the future.
One good way to keep them good is free speech to be able to publicly shame them. If you decide to violently overthrow them, free speech helps you organize opposition.
"You have to remove liberty to fight those who would remove liberty from you."
I think it's more like if someone would deny you a liberty, you don't need to extend that liberty to them even if you want it. People who don't want freedom of speech, well... fuck their speech then.
there's something wrong inside the "black community"
Why is there ever a need to publicly talk about "black community"? If anti social behavior had a sufficient deterrent, either legal or otherwise then the "black community" wouldn't be a problem.
If I use it as a defense
That is something you would be doing in private. Public agitation is different than private conversation.
You have to remove liberty to fight those who would remove liberty from you
You have to remove liberty from the ones who would remove liberty from you, were they given the opportunity, yes.
Hate to appear to pile on, but diagnosing a particular issue is the first step towards resolving it.
You say that in a healthy society that you propose, blacks would not be disproportionately engaged in criminal activity. But if anyone who attempted to address this issue were punished, I can just as easily see impunity resulting in even worse outcomes. And if your other proposals are successful at combating black criminality, then there would be no need to punish people making such comments - just say, what are you talking about, they're not more criminal than other groups.
Here in Europe, you are not allowed to talk about the depredations of the rapefugees. Does this result in them raping less? On the contrary, they rape just as much as they want, and the politicians protect them.
It appears every red state is going to have to get screwed over by the Jews (and other ethnic groups) before they realize the folly of rushing to the defense of them. Red states are all stuck in 00s conservatism/ liberalism.
Yup. Playing whack-a-mole with the symptoms while ignoring the cause. Ethnic solidarity and nepotism for me, multiculturalism and civic nationalism for thee.
I have also heard the federal government is now paying illegals to go back to Texas and stay for free at hotels in Dallas and Houston. Is he doing anything to stop that or was this shell game part of his plan all along?
What do they even gain from doing that? Wouldn't that just give Texas more house seats? Of course I'm sure there are other motives, but you would think they'd want to cram them into blue states instead.
For comparison, a response from the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE, a 1st amendment-oriented group) https://archive.is/OKeBt
...When anti-Semitic speech crosses beyond the First Amendment’s protection, Texas institutions have a moral and legal obligation to take action. But today’s executive order relies on a definition of anti-Semitism that reaches core political speech, including criticism of Israel. The order also singles out student organizations by name, suggesting these groups should draw official scrutiny on account of their views.
State-mandated campus censorship violates the First Amendment and will not effectively answer anti-Semitism. By chilling campus speech, the executive order threatens to sabotage the transformative power of debate and discussion. That’s in sharp contrast to Texas state law, which wisely recognizes “freedom of speech and assembly as central to the mission of institutions of higher education.” When speech on contentious issues is subject to punishment, minds cannot be changed.
Texas’ public colleges and universities are required by federal law to address anti-Semitic harassment. They’re also bound by the Constitution to respect their students’ First Amendment rights. For the sake of our country, they can and must do both.
This is what infuriates me about the Jewish problem--criticize Israel and you're guilty of "anti-semitism." The bullshit accusation is being used to morally blackmail duped Americans into supporting their idiotic tribal war.
I already can't talk about crime statistics or what books the Nazis were actually burning so any official tool that can be used effectively against my enemies, leftists, suits me just fine. I'd rather not have to resort to things like this but if throwing their organizers in jail over BDS is what it takes to get them thrown in jail, so be it.
Pro tip: if you want to censor Stormfags on public university campuses, then I can't say that you're just as bad as they are, but that you're worse. Because they're not trying to censor other people.
He literally acts out the oy vey greatest ally meme stereotype the conpro fags are constantly referencing. He also calls the wehraboos "far right" when we all know what they actually are is leftist.
He is acting out a role as a manipulator, not a good faith poster.
The appropriate punishment from the government for rhetoric should be none in a free society.
1st Amendment absolutism is basically a measure of whether or not you're American.
That is offensive. I'm a European 1st Amendment absolutist. That said, people here wouldn't know what liberty is if it hit them on the head, despite constantly talking about how "we live in a free country".
There is no free society anymore.
Disagree, some agitation is so harmful it needs to be legally prosecuted, specifically the kind that is capable of destroying the other freedoms of the society.
Specifically public fomentation of resentment. If every person who ever publicly asked the question "why are there so many blacks in prison?" or "why are women paid less than men?" was arrested, spent the night in jail, and was charged a hefty fine the world would be a better place.
You can't defeat marxism under a liberal framework, if you could then we wouldn't be in this mess.
So.. if I want to invoke this as an indication there's something wrong inside the "black community" then I should go to jail? If I use it as a defense in an argument as to why I don't "default trust" black people? Jail?
Is that like your biggest fear.. spending a night in jail? What do you think happens in jail?
"You have to remove liberty to fight those who would remove liberty from you."
k.
I think the implication he's making is that a benevolent dictatorship would be more effective than a corrupt democracy – which is probably true, but only if you're making the assumption that the dictatorship will continue to support your interests in the future.
I'll take a good king over a corrupt council any day. The problem comes when the not good kings start showing up.
One good way to keep them good is free speech to be able to publicly shame them. If you decide to violently overthrow them, free speech helps you organize opposition.
I think it's more like if someone would deny you a liberty, you don't need to extend that liberty to them even if you want it. People who don't want freedom of speech, well... fuck their speech then.
Why is there ever a need to publicly talk about "black community"? If anti social behavior had a sufficient deterrent, either legal or otherwise then the "black community" wouldn't be a problem.
That is something you would be doing in private. Public agitation is different than private conversation.
You have to remove liberty from the ones who would remove liberty from you, were they given the opportunity, yes.
Hate to appear to pile on, but diagnosing a particular issue is the first step towards resolving it.
You say that in a healthy society that you propose, blacks would not be disproportionately engaged in criminal activity. But if anyone who attempted to address this issue were punished, I can just as easily see impunity resulting in even worse outcomes. And if your other proposals are successful at combating black criminality, then there would be no need to punish people making such comments - just say, what are you talking about, they're not more criminal than other groups.
Here in Europe, you are not allowed to talk about the depredations of the rapefugees. Does this result in them raping less? On the contrary, they rape just as much as they want, and the politicians protect them.
lol indeed
It appears every red state is going to have to get screwed over by the Jews (and other ethnic groups) before they realize the folly of rushing to the defense of them. Red states are all stuck in 00s conservatism/ liberalism.
Yup. Playing whack-a-mole with the symptoms while ignoring the cause. Ethnic solidarity and nepotism for me, multiculturalism and civic nationalism for thee.
I have also heard the federal government is now paying illegals to go back to Texas and stay for free at hotels in Dallas and Houston. Is he doing anything to stop that or was this shell game part of his plan all along?
He better!
If he intended to stop it hed have put them all in a pruson camp in the desert instead of shipping them further into the country.
What do they even gain from doing that? Wouldn't that just give Texas more house seats? Of course I'm sure there are other motives, but you would think they'd want to cram them into blue states instead.
more seats, but also more able to flip them all to blue
Taking them in would be a devil's bargain.
i'm getting REALLY TIRED of this "the second something inconveniences the jews it's dealt with" thing.
For comparison, a response from the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE, a 1st amendment-oriented group) https://archive.is/OKeBt
This is what infuriates me about the Jewish problem--criticize Israel and you're guilty of "anti-semitism." The bullshit accusation is being used to morally blackmail duped Americans into supporting their idiotic tribal war.
Goddamn it.
He was doing a decent job of being governor recently till now.
Why are all of our Republican governors like this?
Freedom of speech must not be infringed upon.
Jews don't deserve special treatment.
If you can criticize anyone else, you can criticize them.
Same reason basically all Republicans support the banks, the weapons industry and every war they've ever seen.
The GOP is the right hand of the regime, just like the Democratic Party is the left hand.
Is anyone surprised at abbott being a faggot? Look how "well" he's handled the border issues.
It seems that Gov. Abbott is a fascist. No surprise, he was a big transgender supporter before he was pressured to reverse course.
I already can't talk about crime statistics or what books the Nazis were actually burning so any official tool that can be used effectively against my enemies, leftists, suits me just fine. I'd rather not have to resort to things like this but if throwing their organizers in jail over BDS is what it takes to get them thrown in jail, so be it.
People criticizing Israel are your enemies?
Well, yeah. He called leftists his enemies. And they do criticize Israel.
And this EO is specifically about the second part. Something anyone and everyone does, not just leftist
You're supposed to read all the words in a post, not just fixate on one and stop processing.
I responded to the most important part of your comment
No you didn't.
Good for him. The stormfags will have to find a new place to form their hate groups.
Pro tip: if you want to censor Stormfags on public university campuses, then I can't say that you're just as bad as they are, but that you're worse. Because they're not trying to censor other people.
Hate speech leads to violence. Therefore there are legitimate grounds for removal.
This poster is a fed. Comes here acting like a stormfag stereotype while stirring shit to incite them, for the purpose of forum sliding.
I do have my suspicions about him.
He literally acts out the oy vey greatest ally meme stereotype the conpro fags are constantly referencing. He also calls the wehraboos "far right" when we all know what they actually are is leftist.
He is acting out a role as a manipulator, not a good faith poster.