LogFAQs > #876923015

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, Database 1 ( 03.09.2017-09.16.2017 ), DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Should alt-right leader Richard Spencer have been punched in the face?
Zeus 04/10/17 3:05:44 PM #20:	Most people learn in kindergarten not to respond to words with violence. People who resort to violence like that are idiots who never learned how to use their words. More importantly, the approval of violence to enforce a status quo is highly reminiscent of groups like the KKK who terrorized anybody who spoke out on matters they disagreed with (showing how far our country is backsliding). And, of course, it echoes the sort of mob mentality that preceded countless fascist governments. Otherwise, I'm not sure why you're posting a very old story which we previously discussed at length on this and other boards. feco91 posted... Right, because if someone doesn't align with your political views, he deserves a punch in the face. tbh, it is an extremely fascistic act and reminiscent of the thuggery that proceeded many of the most brutal regimes in world history. BlackScythe0 posted... And 7 year olds get in fights with other 7 year olds claim to be their father. Which is a spectacularly stupid analogy for any number of reasons, besides the implicit defense of this violence. waterdeepchu posted... No, he shouldn't have. But at the same time, I don't feel particularly bad that he was. Regardless of what you feel for him, you should feel badly for the state of our nation that people are trying to justify this. Not only because it demonstrates a bankrupt morality, but it could start a cycle of violence or potentially escalate further as more thugs are emboldened by the attacker's success. Today it's punching, tomorrow it could be shooting. Rottenmonk posted... You know, free speech is a thing, but when your 'speech' calls for literally killing whole groups of people, then those views should not be allowed to be given agency. Punch away. Overlooking that I can find no citation for him ever calling to kill groups of people -- can you provide any? -- that STILL wouldn't justify taking the law into your own hands. Further, the only people who might have it coming are people who advocate punching people in the face because that'd be karmic justice, but even then I'm not for it. nurlen posted... feco91 posted... I don't see him and his kind murdering innocent civilians. Do you? Indirectly? Absolutely. Not even indirectly, unless you count the fact that he's a tax-paying American at which point you open yourself up to being punched because you're also indirectly murdering innocent civilians through funding the government. --- (\/)(\/)\|-\| In Zeus We Trust: All Others Pay Cash <cite>Zeus posted [p:876923015] in Should alt... [t:75220033]...</cite> <quote>Most people learn in kindergarten not to respond to words with violence. People who resort to violence like that are idiots who never learned how to use their words. More importantly, the approval of violence to enforce a status quo is highly reminiscent of groups like the KKK who terrorized anybody who spoke out on matters they disagreed with (showing how far our country is backsliding). And, of course, it echoes the sort of mob mentality that preceded countless fascist governments. Otherwise, I'm not sure why you're posting a very old story which we previously discussed at length on this and other boards. <cite>feco91 posted...</cite> <quote>Right, because if someone doesn't align with your political views, he deserves a punch in the face. </quote> tbh, it is an extremely fascistic act and reminiscent of the thuggery that proceeded many of the most brutal regimes in world history. <cite>BlackScythe0 posted...</cite> <quote>And 7 year olds get in fights with other 7 year olds claim to be their father. </quote> Which is a spectacularly stupid analogy for any number of reasons, besides the implicit defense of this violence. <cite>waterdeepchu posted...</cite> <quote>No, he shouldn't have. But at the same time, I don't feel particularly bad that he was.</quote> Regardless of what you feel for him, you should feel badly for the state of our nation that people are trying to justify this. Not only because it demonstrates a bankrupt morality, but it could start a cycle of violence or potentially escalate further as more thugs are emboldened by the attacker's success. Today it's punching, tomorrow it could be shooting. <cite>Rottenmonk posted...</cite> <quote>You know, free speech is a thing, but when your 'speech' calls for literally killing whole groups of people, then those views should not be allowed to be given agency. Punch away.</quote> Overlooking that I can find no citation for him ever calling to kill groups of people -- can you provide any? -- that STILL wouldn't justify taking the law into your own hands. Further, the only people who might have it coming are people who advocate punching people in the face because that'd be karmic justice, but even then I'm not for it. <cite>nurlen posted...</cite> <quote><cite>feco91 posted...</cite> <quote>I don't see him and his kind murdering innocent civilians. Do you?</quote> Indirectly? Absolutely.</quote> Not even indirectly, unless you count the fact that he's a tax-paying American at which point you open yourself up to being punched because you're also indirectly murdering innocent civilians through funding the government. --- (\/)(\/)\|-\| In Zeus We Trust: All Others Pay Cash</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1