Comment by SwellJoe
9 years ago
OK, so we're re-litigating the paradox of tolerance. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance)
Let's figure out where the line is for you.
Do you believe Al Qaeda should be able to obtain permits and police protection to hold rallies across the country to recruit people to their cause?
Since we're doing stupid questions:
Do believe that free speech should be suppressed, simply because you don't like the people? Or you don't like the topic of their speech?
a) yes - you don't believe in free speech
b) no - you do believe in free speech
I live in Canada, which had the concept of "hate speech", that you apparently are in agreement with. It got repealed because it was stupid, abusive, and being abused.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech_laws_in_Canada
So you can deny history, as you seem intent on doing, or you can learn from history.
I gave a concrete example, you've asked a hypothetical.
I believe in and have activated (actual feet-on-the ground, talking to reps, writing letters, teaching free classes on encryption, etc., real activist shit) for free speech for decades. I also believe in and will activate for a world free of Nazis. There is no conflict there, and I'm completely comfortable with my position on both free speech and opposing Nazis in every way possible.
You still haven't answered my question: Do you believe Al Qaeda, not some amorphous blob of "free speech", should be able to obtain permits and police protection to hold recruiting rallies across the US?
This isn't about whether I "like" or "dislike" certain speech, this is about known terrorist organizations recruiting with the consent and participation of our government.
I live in the US, where the stakes are real. White supremacy has a long, deadly, history in my country. You have your own white supremacist problem in Canada (and some of them came to the US for the Unite the Right rally), but it may not currently be an existential threat to your democracy. It is exactly that, right now, here in the US.
> I gave a concrete example, you've asked a hypothetical.
And... I'm done.
You're not arguing from a position of honest discourse.