Spartanforlife4
Generic Catchy Message
The girl was. I would assume most were. I'd hope there aren't that many 35+ yr old trolls scouring twitter and 4chan daily to post memes.
USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
POTUS 45.5 - Sweden is Under Attack
- Thread starter ScoobyDoo
- Start date
- Status
The girl was. I would assume most were. I'd hope there aren't that many 35+ yr old trolls scouring twitter and 4chan daily to post memes.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: POTUS 45.5 - Sweden is Under Attack
Ugh. Like Dracula, you just can't kill them, they always come back in the sequel.
When I get my time machine I'm going to go back and kill Leo Strauss. And that's despite having tremendous respect for his scholarship. But his students (Wolfowitz, Kagan, etc) are such awful human beings that baby can go out with the bathwater.
Ugh. Like Dracula, you just can't kill them, they always come back in the sequel.
When I get my time machine I'm going to go back and kill Leo Strauss. And that's despite having tremendous respect for his scholarship. But his students (Wolfowitz, Kagan, etc) are such awful human beings that baby can go out with the bathwater.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: POTUS 45.5 - Sweden is Under Attack
My point was this: does remedy x help or hinder in the effect it is trying to achieve?
But I'll engage with your other point: I am not saying the core group of skinheads are skinheads because society reviles skinheads. But I do think that overbroad generalizations which lump other groups of whites in with skinheads allow skinheads to recruit more effectively.
Let me cite an example: the insistence by Maher and others to prepend Islamic to violent extremism. I think all this does is help the actual extremists spread their ideology to Muslims more broadly because the latter now feel ostracized. I think that should be a non-controversial position among liberals.
Likewise, I think broad attacks on, say, "white privilege" allow execrable white racists to convince work-a-day whites that whiteness itself is under siege. I hear this sentiment all the time among my white blue collar coworkers who are, at worst, casually racist in the way that virtually all human beings are. They certainly aren't genuine, dangerous violent racists. And yet we have helped legitimize the complaints of the latter by painting with a broad brush.
And before I'm attacked I am not declaring the two cases equivalent. I'm saying the same sociological mechanism is at work in each case, albeit at a very different place on the spectrum.
I also don't think I deserved the virulence of the language in your response. In this instance I genuinely am "only asking the question." And I'm pretty sure I have demonstrated my liberal bona fides over the years to survive an ideological purge of not being intolerant enough of racists. I'm plenty intolerant, trust me.
My point was this: does remedy x help or hinder in the effect it is trying to achieve?
But I'll engage with your other point: I am not saying the core group of skinheads are skinheads because society reviles skinheads. But I do think that overbroad generalizations which lump other groups of whites in with skinheads allow skinheads to recruit more effectively.
Let me cite an example: the insistence by Maher and others to prepend Islamic to violent extremism. I think all this does is help the actual extremists spread their ideology to Muslims more broadly because the latter now feel ostracized. I think that should be a non-controversial position among liberals.
Likewise, I think broad attacks on, say, "white privilege" allow execrable white racists to convince work-a-day whites that whiteness itself is under siege. I hear this sentiment all the time among my white blue collar coworkers who are, at worst, casually racist in the way that virtually all human beings are. They certainly aren't genuine, dangerous violent racists. And yet we have helped legitimize the complaints of the latter by painting with a broad brush.
And before I'm attacked I am not declaring the two cases equivalent. I'm saying the same sociological mechanism is at work in each case, albeit at a very different place on the spectrum.
I also don't think I deserved the virulence of the language in your response. In this instance I genuinely am "only asking the question." And I'm pretty sure I have demonstrated my liberal bona fides over the years to survive an ideological purge of not being intolerant enough of racists. I'm plenty intolerant, trust me.
Last edited:
The Sicatoka
Kicizapi Cetan
Re: POTUS 45.5 - Sweden is Under Attack
Murder is murder. Rape is rape. Arson is arson.
No further qualifier is necessary.
Murder is murder. Rape is rape. Arson is arson.
No further qualifier is necessary.
St. Clown
Liberal Rebel Scum, apparently
Re: POTUS 45.5 - Sweden is Under Attack
Who has to eat their own words? By the end of his term, it'll be the people who voted for him. We the Nation are not going to come out of this without some bumps and bruises, at a minimum, or cuts and broken bones, all the more likely.
Who has to eat their own words? By the end of his term, it'll be the people who voted for him. We the Nation are not going to come out of this without some bumps and bruises, at a minimum, or cuts and broken bones, all the more likely.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: POTUS 45.5 - Sweden is Under Attack
Not exactly, though, because context sometimes makes the crime. If you burn a cross on my lawn that's very different from burning a cross on a black person's lawn. The law should not be limited to the property damage. There are contextual elements that have to be considered -- the cross on the black man's lawn is a much bigger threat of further violence.
I think hate crimes were trying to acknowledge that, which is a valid concern. The problem in Britain at least is now you can go to jail for using the "n" word, and that's crazy.
Not exactly, though, because context sometimes makes the crime. If you burn a cross on my lawn that's very different from burning a cross on a black person's lawn. The law should not be limited to the property damage. There are contextual elements that have to be considered -- the cross on the black man's lawn is a much bigger threat of further violence.
I think hate crimes were trying to acknowledge that, which is a valid concern. The problem in Britain at least is now you can go to jail for using the "n" word, and that's crazy.
Re: POTUS 45.5 - Sweden is Under Attack
#NotAllRacists
The difference in your examples is that Group B is actually doing the thing they're being accused of.
#NotAllRacists
The difference in your examples is that Group B is actually doing the thing they're being accused of.
ScoobyDoo
NPC
Re: POTUS 45.5 - Sweden is Under Attack
Every time we "name" something it gets worse. For some reason the Orange Baboon is obsessed with naming things.
Also, as long as were talking about criminal justice. Get rid of Capital Punishment on Economic grounds AND start treating inmates like human beings. It is staggering reading about solitary confinement and what it does to a human being. Yes, we need to lock these people up and throw away the key but that doesn't mean we treat them like animals. Hell, we shouldn't even be treating the animals that way.
Every time we "name" something it gets worse. For some reason the Orange Baboon is obsessed with naming things.
Also, as long as were talking about criminal justice. Get rid of Capital Punishment on Economic grounds AND start treating inmates like human beings. It is staggering reading about solitary confinement and what it does to a human being. Yes, we need to lock these people up and throw away the key but that doesn't mean we treat them like animals. Hell, we shouldn't even be treating the animals that way.
The Sicatoka
Kicizapi Cetan
Re: POTUS 45.5 - Sweden is Under Attack
Really? Why'd you lead with ...
Your beef is what he says. Quite simply, tough. See: Amendement I.
I don't have to like what he or anyone says, but I will defend the right to say it (even if it'll cost the speaker dearly).
But as I said, if he's a thief, or threatening violence, that's not the same. It's wrong.
PS - Keep up the name calling. It says all that need be known about the speaker. Just ask Milo.
Really? Why'd you lead with ...
Your beef is what he says. Quite simply, tough. See: Amendement I.
I don't have to like what he or anyone says, but I will defend the right to say it (even if it'll cost the speaker dearly).
But as I said, if he's a thief, or threatening violence, that's not the same. It's wrong.
PS - Keep up the name calling. It says all that need be known about the speaker. Just ask Milo.
unofan
Well-known member
Except there are degrees of homicide and murder, degrees of sexual assault, and degrees of property damage.
I have come around and no longer have a problem with hate crime legislation essentially being an aggravating factor that ups the degree of the underlying charge.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: POTUS 45.5 - Sweden is Under Attack
I don't see why I deserve your scorn. If I read you right you think that phrasing the issue as I have risks normalizing racism. I've been trying to directly address that. We as individuals should shame racist behavior, everywhere, all the time. It's not acceptable behavior socially. This.
But it's also not illegal, for very important reasons. If you think a majority of society finding something repugnant justifies making it illegal, you just made atheism illegal. Sometimes a majority -- even a vast majority -- of society are small-minded morons.
The American solution has been to have a bright line at the law: individuals can think and say and for the most part print anything they like, no matter how awful the majority thinks that is, without the threat of government legal action. And individuals can shame that thinking / speech / writing likewise with impunity from government legal action. The marketplace of ideas includes both hateful statements and hateful denouncements of those ideas, and the battle is fought in the mind of the individual. Whenever those ideas are translated into corporeal action, then the law steps in to stop discrimination.
I think that system is a good way to maintain the balance between formal tolerance of controversial opinion and informal intolerance of bigotry.
#NotAllRacists
The difference in your examples is that Group B is actually doing the thing they're being accused of.
I don't see why I deserve your scorn. If I read you right you think that phrasing the issue as I have risks normalizing racism. I've been trying to directly address that. We as individuals should shame racist behavior, everywhere, all the time. It's not acceptable behavior socially. This.
But it's also not illegal, for very important reasons. If you think a majority of society finding something repugnant justifies making it illegal, you just made atheism illegal. Sometimes a majority -- even a vast majority -- of society are small-minded morons.
The American solution has been to have a bright line at the law: individuals can think and say and for the most part print anything they like, no matter how awful the majority thinks that is, without the threat of government legal action. And individuals can shame that thinking / speech / writing likewise with impunity from government legal action. The marketplace of ideas includes both hateful statements and hateful denouncements of those ideas, and the battle is fought in the mind of the individual. Whenever those ideas are translated into corporeal action, then the law steps in to stop discrimination.
I think that system is a good way to maintain the balance between formal tolerance of controversial opinion and informal intolerance of bigotry.
The Sicatoka
Kicizapi Cetan
Re: POTUS 45.5 - Sweden is Under Attack
Kep, it is the same crime if someone comes to you or your neighbor's. It's threat and intimidation.
However, you wanna burn a cross in your front yard, well, say what you want to say. Do it in someone else's and you have entered the criminal realm.
Kep, it is the same crime if someone comes to you or your neighbor's. It's threat and intimidation.
However, you wanna burn a cross in your front yard, well, say what you want to say. Do it in someone else's and you have entered the criminal realm.
Handyman
Hug someone you care about...
Re: POTUS 45.5 - Sweden is Under Attack
That would be true if we lived in a vacuum where justice is blind and everyone is equal. We dont.
And lets not pretend we dont add qualifiers to this stuff all the time. If murder is murder how come when a Muslim does it they are called terrorists? Why is it when a white boy shoots up a church he is labelled as crazy? We use these labels all the time to mitigate guilt or to make people seem more scary hate crimes laws arent the only way. (they arent even the most prevalent way terrorism is)
I am not a big fan of the laws but seeing as we are living in a society that 50 years after the Civil Rights Movement still has States try and limit the vote of Blacks (and even get caught admitting it...not to mention we have a racist as the AG) and where sexual assault is laughed about by our President and his cronies and where violence against Jews and Gays is on the rise at rapid levels (and never really subsided anyways) I would rather have them than not. Murder may be murder, but some murder against some people is punished differently than some murder by other people. Until that changes then I hope they make hate crimes even stiffer penalty-wise. They can sit on it and twirl.
That would be true if we lived in a vacuum where justice is blind and everyone is equal. We dont.
And lets not pretend we dont add qualifiers to this stuff all the time. If murder is murder how come when a Muslim does it they are called terrorists? Why is it when a white boy shoots up a church he is labelled as crazy? We use these labels all the time to mitigate guilt or to make people seem more scary hate crimes laws arent the only way. (they arent even the most prevalent way terrorism is)
I am not a big fan of the laws but seeing as we are living in a society that 50 years after the Civil Rights Movement still has States try and limit the vote of Blacks (and even get caught admitting it...not to mention we have a racist as the AG) and where sexual assault is laughed about by our President and his cronies and where violence against Jews and Gays is on the rise at rapid levels (and never really subsided anyways) I would rather have them than not. Murder may be murder, but some murder against some people is punished differently than some murder by other people. Until that changes then I hope they make hate crimes even stiffer penalty-wise. They can sit on it and twirl.
Handyman
Hug someone you care about...
Re: POTUS 45.5 - Sweden is Under Attack
The is regulating speech, that is a different animal. If Breitbart wants to post racist crap and if Jeff Sessions wants to talk about the superiority of Whites that is their right. Once they act in furtherance of that though that changes things.
The is regulating speech, that is a different animal. If Breitbart wants to post racist crap and if Jeff Sessions wants to talk about the superiority of Whites that is their right. Once they act in furtherance of that though that changes things.
The Sicatoka
Kicizapi Cetan
Re: POTUS 45.5 - Sweden is Under Attack
There are no degrees of murder to the victim. They're dead. Claiming the punishment should be worse because of an aggravating factor is saying that factor is more valuable than the life that was taken, or that one life is more valuable than another.
There are no degrees of murder to the victim. They're dead. Claiming the punishment should be worse because of an aggravating factor is saying that factor is more valuable than the life that was taken, or that one life is more valuable than another.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: POTUS 45.5 - Sweden is Under Attack
Burning a cross on your property across from my house is a much better example than mine. If you burn a cross across from my house, you're just an idiot. If you burn a cross across from a black man's house, you're an idiot but you've just made a threat that's on par with standing on your property across from me and shouting into a bullhorn "I think somebody should kill you and rape your wife."
The latter is, I'm pretty sure, some sort of crime. So the two cross-burnings actually are different in terms of their criminality. And I think that's what hate crimes are trying to capture.
If you fly a confederate flag across the street from a black man that just makes you a redneck dou-chebag with a small dick. The flag has more meanings than a burning cross, which is unmistakeable. There is a reasonable person standard as to what constitutes a threat of harm.
Burning a cross on your property across from my house is a much better example than mine. If you burn a cross across from my house, you're just an idiot. If you burn a cross across from a black man's house, you're an idiot but you've just made a threat that's on par with standing on your property across from me and shouting into a bullhorn "I think somebody should kill you and rape your wife."
The latter is, I'm pretty sure, some sort of crime. So the two cross-burnings actually are different in terms of their criminality. And I think that's what hate crimes are trying to capture.
If you fly a confederate flag across the street from a black man that just makes you a redneck dou-chebag with a small dick. The flag has more meanings than a burning cross, which is unmistakeable. There is a reasonable person standard as to what constitutes a threat of harm.
Handyman
Hug someone you care about...
Re: POTUS 45.5 - Sweden is Under Attack
To you it is the same crime, to them it isnt. You have to add in mitigating factors for these things. We do it with every crime adding in hate is just another factor. It shouldnt be the ONLY factor but if you cant see why it is different then you are willfully being blind.
To you it is the same crime, to them it isnt. You have to add in mitigating factors for these things. We do it with every crime adding in hate is just another factor. It shouldnt be the ONLY factor but if you cant see why it is different then you are willfully being blind.
Re: POTUS 45.5 - Sweden is Under Attack
There are degrees with those crimes, but aren't those degrees separated by things like the level of intent involved, the actual act of sexual assault committed or age of the victim, etc...? We don't take a theft charge for instance, and enhance it because the thief intended bad fortune on the victim, as opposed to just wanting to steal the money. I always thought motive was just a way of explaining to a jury why someone may have done something, as opposed to an actual element of the crime.
Re: POTUS 45.5 - Sweden is Under Attack
Well that's the piece of **** you keep bending over backwards to defend, which by default, makes you a piece of **** too.
Well that's the piece of **** you keep bending over backwards to defend, which by default, makes you a piece of **** too.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: POTUS 45.5 - Sweden is Under Attack
This is also untrue. If I shoot you I'm a one-off murderer. But if I shoot you and pin to your chest "I hate white people," that means after I serve my time I'm a risk to murder other white people, which should factor in my sentencing.
This is also untrue. If I shoot you I'm a one-off murderer. But if I shoot you and pin to your chest "I hate white people," that means after I serve my time I'm a risk to murder other white people, which should factor in my sentencing.
- Status