Is all fair in love and war? I got an email today requesting that I join 1000 others in (falsely / indiscriminately) accusing PragerU of racist “hate“ speech. Could this ironically be considered an act to incite violence on a speaker? Are protestors ever justified in such attacks if it helps their cause? Is an online mob different from offline?
Too many "keyboard" warriors and their VIRTUE. Dont fall for it. I have seen and read many articles on prager U and they are the furthest thing thing from Racism. We all know that "HateSpeech" is abroad term. I hate taxes, I hate Racists, I hate communism, I hate cloudy days,I hate stubbing my toes on the coffee table. Does that make me a hate monger? NO.. its too many whiny kids who may look like adults whining about comfort and intellectual safety rather than real hard truths.
It isn't a big deal if the rest of us go on websites and start going against their crappy comments. I have never seen a racist Prager video, but I definitely haven't seen anywhere close to all of them. We just need to fight the allegations intelligently. We got the minds to do it, we just need to fight the garbage.
Is all fair in love and war? Great opening question, usually a phrase used by the truly impotent who feel all other options are exhausted.
An act of violence? It is not in the least ironic, when applied to these types of SJW's, whose reasoning skills seem to be non-existent and are fueled by a hive like mentality that could do harm in lots of ways, except they have become tiresome and predictable and most aren't falling for the BS so much.
Is it ever justified? Would have been nice if it had been done against Hitler, who was a self declared racist who murdered millions. And not something used whenever all you have in your intellectual arsenal is absolutely nothing.
Prager U wants a conversation to be had about the perceptions of what constitutes racism, so no, not the same. It was fascinating that the Asians were the only ones who didn't have a problem with it, yet again highlighting the absurdity of the so called woke, lol !
Is an online mob different from offline? Another that made me think Would have to say mobs are always bad news, virtual pitchforks vs real ones? The virtual damage though, it would depend on your level of investment and in this case, against Dennis Prager, the mob wouldn't stand a chance! Anyway, these are what I think, could be way off the mark, but will accept the participation medal, lololol
My attitude towards anybody using the phrase; “hate speech” is ... “Screw Them ...”
They have exhibited the fact that they are mindless morons incapable of actual thought.
You cannot have a “Battle of the Wits” with an unarmed person and even feel good when you stand over their cold carcass ... they just never “get it”.
Can you consider such a request to be “violence”?
Only if you stoop to their level and even recognize their nonsense as being meaningful.
No, all is not fair in love and war. This is a case of refusal to allow others their 1st Amendment rights. Leftists want to do away with free speech. Entirely. The only speech that they want to allow is speech that agrees with their agenda. What they seem to be totally missing is that their rights only extent to the point where someone else's rights begin -- at that point, their rights END.
Facebook, and other social media platforms, don't have the time, money, or resources to look at every submittal, so they rely on their members to help them by reporting improper material; however, they've changed their view of "improper" to be more and more immoral / leftist / INtolerant. So, when a certain number of people report a posting, then the person who posted it gets put in FB jail automatically. IMHO, I believe that the biggest reason that more conservatives get put in FB jail is because leftists are snowflakes who cannot abide any opinion that opposes their own, so they report anything and everything that "offends" them; however, on the other side of the spectrum, "classical liberals" and conservatives whose main mantra is the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights do not want to stifle speech, so they hardly ever, IF EVER, report any posting whatsoever. [Hum, think I'll setup a poll.]
Now, I'm not advocating that we start reporting other posters, because I do believe STRONGLY that everyone deserves to have the right/ability to voice their opinion -- no matter how distasteful. I don't have to read/listen to it if I don't want to and I definitely do NOT have to agree with it or respond to it, but they need to be allowed their free speech.
I live in a town of 18k people, surrounding area makes about 40k total... we have this kind of shit happening here in what we thought was a small town. These fucking communist keep banding together and secretly using emails to make it appear that they are a majority. this is the failure of our system at work. people think the majority gets to rule when in fact its logic. Media Matters and all these communist entities are gaining traction under the false pretense that every one thinks like them. so law makers act on these squeaky wheels impulses and ends up ruining peoples lives. there has to be a way to end this shit before people start using guns and bombs and shit to rectify the imbalance. one thing these people don't count on ;is the lack of irrational behavior from the right. they assume that they can keep corning people and assaulting them without repercussions and you can't just do that shit, its literally the one thing that holds a civil society together and they would rather drag this country down the drain before giving a single inch of logical thought to their cause.
I'm not even going to read what others say and I'm not sure of your inclination but I'm on the side robust free and offensive speech. I don't recognize hate speech as an actual thing. I support misinformation and disinformation because if a person is stupid enough to not be able to discern truth then they deserve to be fooled. ..... So, fuck media matters. Tell them to fuck off and that you're coming after them. Always respond swiftly and violently and always be ready to die.
It's not necessarily a matter of morals, but rather of your hierarchy of moral principles. I am a believer in the Biblical accounts. There are many moral absolutes in the Bible. But many of those absolutes have remarkably fuzzy edges.
In the Decalogue lying is absolutely forbidden. But in 1st Samuel Michal, David's wife, is implicitly praised for lying to protect David from Saul's jealous rage. She was lying to save a life. Again, implicitly praised. There are many examples of these kinds of moral hierarchies in operation in Bible accounts.
Are Prager U videos false? Are they racist hate speech? If they are, are they egregious enough to be banned? If they aren't, are they dangerous enough to be lied about? Based on what hierarchy of values?
Shows a clear disdain for their audience. How about - "Watch this video. We believe that at x:xx they are promoting racism. If you agree then please report them to Facebook."
Not an incitement to violence. Besides, the best way to combat hate speech is more speech. Mob violence in an operable Republic/Democracy is never OK.
[civicskunk.works] - have a read. Maybe socialism just needs another chance?
If milquetoast Prager U is "racist" and "hateful" then we will never win back our nations and Civilization. Prager and his treasonous ilk are created (or at least allowed) by the Left as a way to moderate us from going Roman on them. It's a way of making sure we aren't being too radical or getting to angry at the correct people for doing what they have done to us.
I have been hearing a lot about PragerU lately. I will have to look them up. It is such a sad state of affairs that my visceral reaction when "average people" say either totally negative or totally positive things about something I immediately become skeptical. When someone I follow closely mentions a word in passing that I am not familiar with it gets added to my "must research ASAP" list. Such is that state of the world. I am grateful that I am able to witness this and I have the luxury of time to research it, however it can be very isolating socially. Thank goodness I have a very understanding partner that sees the world the same way and we can debate things. Also, one of the my children is a very good sounding board for things. If I did not have those two people I really don't know where I would be right now... I'd be so depressed and isolated
Interesting that in criticizing Prager U there are no specifics just generalizations, seems their main complaint is it is working somewhat. Claiming they are unfairly spending millions to push their agenda says nothing of the billions spent by the media, politicians and Hollywood to push theirs. Competition of ideas is what it's all about. I weary of all the claims of racism, now falsely expanded to economics, ecology and nationalism. America is a melting pot, our founding ideas are the basis for and about our nationalism, they are our union. Our nationalism is nothing to be ashamed of.
I categorically reject the term "hate speech." It's a neologism that is used as a weapon to undermine the First Amendment. Look at the evil caused by the concept in the UK, for example, where you have the cops dragging people into custody and "investigating" them for things they post online.
I also believe we need to be extremely careful with the concept of "inciting violence," which is used to rationalize hate speech laws.
There is no such thing as an "online mob." It is a metaphor. Real mobs are less likely to be incited or formed as the result of online BS than real-time events like talks by Ben Shapiro, Milo Yiannopolous, Jordan Peterson, Dave Rubin, etc.
Notice that Leftist public speakers have no such problem. Why do you suppose that's the case?
I would not say that is inciting violence, but I would say that it amounts to some form of libel or defamation. You would think people would be able to file lawsuits against people who lead these kinds of crusades against them. You could certainly make a case for damages done in court.