News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
The end goal of hate speech is violence, what's special about the US is that violence targeted specifically against marginalized groups is condoned if not encouraged.
So yes, hate speech that threatens violence against a marginalized group is legal in the US. I.E. Nazis.
Yea but not really though...
You can say "I hate Nazis" and that's hate speech (as stupid as that might sound), but it doesn't mean "I want to hurt/kill Nazis", the intention behind the message isn't stated therefore the message is lawful.
If you don't want to punch Nazis you're probably a bad person.
We're having a discussion about the law, not morality, I used that as an example to reverse the situation and put the counter protesters in the other position, but it's exactly the same as those Nazis saying they hate blacks or Jews or whoever, in the US they have the right to say that, they don't have the right to say they want to hurt them.
You don't choose to be born Jewish or black, you do choose to be a Nazi, and a Nazi is someone who inflicts violence on people.
Identifying as a Nazi is a threat of violence that is considered legally acceptable in the US because the US already partway to being a Nazi country.
Use whatever example you want, it's always the same thing. It's a discussion about laws and you keep mixing your feelings in the equation. In the eyes of the law there's a difference between stating your hate X and stating you want to be violent towards X, one is legal, the other isn't, no matter which group X is.
Yes, because the US is halfway to being a Nazi state, the law is overly permissive of Nazis.
Just like how the US started as a white supremacist nation where the law allowed slavery.
My feelings have nothing to do with the extent to which white supremacy and Nazism influences the US state to allow threats of violence against marginalized groups to be permissible. US law is not impartial, it is biased in favor of Nazis and white supremacists.
If the law is the same for everyone no matter who they say they hate then the law isn't overly permissive to a certain group of haters.
You're spouting the same bullshit used to justify redlining. The law is not the same for everyone. Even if letter of the law stays neutral, the way it gets enforced matters.
Notice how students that peacefully protest for Palestine get arrested and put in handcuffs, but literal Nazis walk free. The law is not the same for everyone.
If you notice, the discussion has been about the law from the get go, not enforcement (although in this case this specific law was enforced properly). I was correcting someone who said that free speech doesn't protect hate speech in the US, but it does.
Yes, I agree, you are correct on this point. Where you are wrong, and where I was correcting you, was that you were saying hate speech is not violence.
Hate speech is violence, Nazism is violence, but it's protected violence, not because of any morality or value around free speech, but because the US is already partly a Nazi state.
It's not violence in the eyes of the law, which is the point of view we were talking about until you jumped in, if you want to have a conversation about that then go ahead, start a conversation about how "free speech law is wrong and hate speech is violent and should be banned" and I'll be on your side, but this is not this conversation.