Man calling for “peaceful ethnic cleansing” gets attacked

[purebalance]

I totally agree. Put him in the same cell with Batman, and apparently Capt. America, and that Archaeology Professor.

Batman and Captain America fight criminals. Nothing he did was criminal. Whoever punched him deserves to go to jail regardless of how you feel about what the victim says.

[Spectral]

I'm comfortable with him getting clocked.

This seems like a pretty big shift of the goalposts from people claiming that he called for or advocates genocide. Maintaining intellectual honesty and integrity is important even if your opponent's an asshole.

[Wells]

This seems like a pretty big shift of the goalposts from people claiming that he called for or advocates genocide. Maintaining intellectual honesty and integrity is important even if your opponent's an asshole.

He's called for "peaceful ethnic segregation". Even if you don't read between the lines its pretty obvious what that would amount to in reality.

[Spectral]

He's called for "peaceful ethnic segregation". Even if you don't read between the lines its pretty obvious what that would amount to in reality.

That sounds a lot to different to me than killing people.

Although I suppose "peaceful" could be used in the same absurd, euphemistic sense that it's used for "peaceful protests".

[Wells]

That sounds a lot to different to me than killing people.

Which strikes me as more than a little naive when one imagines how it will actually be executed.

Contextually, the Nazi party started with similar rhetoric about achieving ethnic purity.

[oleander89]

If they advocate mass murder, yes, it's pretty ok to punch them.

It worked for the 43 group, it can work now.

Show me anywhere where Richard Spencer has ever advocated for violence.

He's an ethnic nationalist. He basically wants to live in an all-white country, and I'm not sure why having an in-group preference is considered the most evil thing in the world. I don't agree with Spencer's political ideas on ethnic nationalism, but he's entitled to them without being assaulted.

[Wells]

Show me anywhere where Richard Spencer has ever advocated for violence.

He's an ethnic nationalist. He basically wants to live in an all-white country, and I'm not sure why having an in-group preference is considered the most evil thing in the world. I don't agree with Spencer's political ideas on ethnic nationalism, but he's entitled to them without being assaulted.

Yeah and I'm sure he'd only want to get that with perfectly peaceful means.

[downnola]

By the logic in this thread, what the country needs are some violent right wing groups going out on the streets and fighting with the violent left wing groups. All those people who were so worried about Trump supporters being violent when he inevitably lost the election, are now encouraging riots and violence in the streets.

And what you idiots don't realize is that the image of Spencer being punched by a rioter is going to make massive numbers of people more sympathetic to him

I'm one of the biggest proponents for free speech you'll find but watching Spencer take a jab does not make me sympathetic for him or his cause. People who use this shitty excuse for supporting people or ideas like him are fools. He's absolutely free to say whatever he likes, but that doesn't mean you're immune to the consquences of being a douchenozzle.

[Spectral]

Which strikes me as more than a little naive when one imagines how it will actually be executed.

Contextually, the Nazi party started with similar rhetoric about achieving ethnic purity.

OK, but I don't really see instigating violence with someone because I don't like their ideas of ethnic separatism becomes cool. Do I have legal and/or moral license to punch Louis Farrakhan in the face? I'm pretty sure I don't.

[Runenwächter]

I feel at some point when a person starts pushing for the mass murder of peaceful humans, they are owed a punch in the face. This might be my southern upbringing talking though, but assholes got punched when they were assholes.

You too seem not to have understood the peaceful part. He doesnt advocate for violence or as you put it the mass murder of peaceful humans. He doesnt even advocate for the mass murder or violent humans such as the cowardly shit eating chuck that was too stupid to properly conceal his own identity.

This doest mean his opinion is worthy supporting, it just means it is protected under the law, which calling for violence against people is not.

[Wells]

OK, but I don't really see instigating violence with someone because I don't like their ideas of ethnic separatism becomes cool. Do I have legal and/or moral license to punch Louis Farrakhan in the face? I'm pretty sure I don't.

I mean if you don't see a moral licence to deck a nazi then ok.

[Spectral]

I mean if you don't see a moral licence to deck a nazi then ok.

Yeah, I don't. If I thought hitting people whose ideology I find abhorrent was cool, I'd head on over to the local U to have a go at the dude teaching the Problem of Whiteness class. For better or worse, one of my values is that people mostly get to say what they want, even if I think they're assholes.

[Wells]

Yeah, I don't. If I thought hitting people whose ideology I find abhorrent was cool, I'd head on over to the local U to have a go at the dude teaching the Problem of Whiteness class. For better or worse, one of my values is that people mostly get to say what they want, even if I think they're assholes.

There's abhorrent, then there's Nazis. I find Paul Ryan's ideology abhorrent. Fascism is something special.

[Spectral]

So is this just supposed to be a super broad cultural consensus, that violence is cool as long as enough of us agree that someone said something sufficiently bad? I don't think you've thought the consequences of this through super well.

[Wells]

So is this just supposed to be a super broad cultural consensus, that violence is cool as long as enough of us agree that someone said something sufficiently bad? I don't think you've thought the consequences of this through super well.

I'm not advocating cracking open skulls or something. Nor am I arguing for legalizing punching people. But if someone wants to take a swing at a Nazi I'm fully prepared to say that's A Good Thing.

[RickJamesLich]

Yup just what I expect from you. The usual idiotic right-wing bullcrap that shows just how clueless you are on complex issues such as this. I mean do you understand even the basics of inter-generational poverty and its causes and consequent effects? No of course you don't.

There is a thing called return on investment. You spend money to make money. As a nation that means investing into communities to make them productive parts of the whole. Its a win win for all concerned. It raises not just their standard of living but your own also. But of course being a right-wing racist you care about none of that, nor do you understand any of it. All you see is "free stuff" for minorities and start raving. Of course this also explains why the republican dominated states that follow your beliefs and don't invest are so poor compared to the blue states. They also see it as "free stuff" for minorities rather than an investment that will pay itself back many-fold over the decades to come. Ergo they stay poor. You stay poor.

I suggest you look into the data and statistics on all this if you actually want to understand any of it because by your comments you obviously currently don't.

As for tackling systemic racism there is plenty of it about which again backed up by lots of hard data. Oh and FYI schools in poor communities on average receive far less funding than those in richer communities. My mind boggles that you somehow believe the opposite is true.

Just between poor and average school districts the difference is 16% less, never mind that between poor and wealthy school districts. This despite the fact that poor districts need more funds than wealthy ones do to bring the students up to scratch, and that there is a far greater educational return in terms of outcomes for each dollar spent by spending it on poor schools as opposed to rich ones (eg having computers at all has a far greater impact than replacing ones that are 4 years old).

I could go on and on. But I think you get the point. As I said go look up the actual evidence and data instead of relying on your right wing beliefs as if those reflect real reality. Because they simply don't. You could start by looking into all those supposed well-funded detroit schools -

Generational poverty at this point is more related to having kids while not being able to afford them and then not properly raising the kids as opposed to any system the government is involved with.

And yes there are returns on investments to a point, but when you factor in things like taxes on businesses causing owners to pack up and leave, yes you have be able to redistribute that wealth to an extent but at the same time you end up creating new poverty since people lose their jobs due to this. This can be seen in places like Baltimore where unemployment rates among african american males (20 to 24) was 37%. Of course you can't just focus on something like taxes, the high crime rate is another big incentive for business owners to not pick Baltimore, but the point is going too far with taxes can create poverty. From this point you have less people working which means less tax dollars for the government to distribute meaning now you have to help less people.

Schools in poorer communities receive less local funding (some) but generally receive more federal funding, in many cases the issue of poor schools is related to crime, teachers don't want to work in areas where their own safety may be at risk unless they are getting paid a lot more money. We've seen almost nothing from the left regarding efforts to help the police make high crime areas safer however. The biggest contributor to such schools is more than likely single mothers giving birth to kids, not properly raising them and leaving them in no condition to attend class. It doesn't matter how much you invest in a school at that point, they cannot substitute the job of being a parent. In this case once more, the job is really on individual Americans themselves as opposed to the government.

Why not do some reading yourself and check out what the teachers themselves have to go through at these schools instead of placing the blame at their feet as well as that of the government? Also Detroit spends more money on students per capita than the national average. I guess throwing money at a problem doesn't always work?

[Spectral]

I'm not advocating cracking open skulls or something. Nor am I arguing for legalizing punching people. But if someone wants to take a swing at a Nazi I'm fully prepared to say that's A Good Thing.

Well, I guess I'm on board. If someone wants to go punch the afore-mentioned anti-white dipshit in the face in his class, I'll mark it down as being on the side of light and righteousness.

[iperson]

Yeah and I'm sure he'd only want to get that with perfectly peaceful means.

Exactly. If you have the wrong thoughts in your head you should be punished. Bring in the Ministry of Love!

[prwraith]

Yeah, I don't. If I thought hitting people whose ideology I find abhorrent was cool, I'd head on over to the local U to have a go at the dude teaching the Problem of Whiteness class. For better or worse, one of my values is that people mostly get to say what they want, even if I think they're assholes.

Gonna have to side with Wells.

There's a difference between people I don't like...let's say Trump supporters. And people who believe in / actively endorse / participated in Nazism / holocaust antics.

I don't feel bad decking someone who's calling for mass genocide / racial purification and I doubt many people do. But trump supports are just people I find abhorrent they're not preaching murder. (generally)

[heef]

What does "Peaceful Ethnic Cleansing" even mean?

It means "I only included the word 'Peaceful' because I had to."