So we should respect this guy propaganda otherwise we are fascists? I see
You can disrespect, mock, satirize or better yet (in my opinion) simply disagree with that guy all you want. I disagree with almost everything he said. However, he's very careful in what he says- he never specifically condones the violence nor does he condemn it- he says many words in order to avoid condemning it. However, he committed no crime and there is no reason to throw him in prison. Not unless it could be proven he is doing something illegal like recruiting for terrorist organization. Freedom of belief and expression by its very nature has to allow for some very reprehensible beliefs.
(As an aside, he somehow linked in 'freedom from insult' when talking about freedom of expression. That's no freedom I've ever heard of.)
He only commited no crime because there are no laws against it. A law makes a crime not the doings of some person. For example if I was to parade in a Nazi uniform wearing the Hakenkreuz and making the Hitler Gruß in Austria all in the open I would get arrested and I would have broken the law and I would have committed a crime. The same would happen if I would publicly deny the Holocaust or do other despicable things.
So why not extend these things and arrest people who come back from fighting their war in Syria or promote that the Sharia should be the law of the land?
Alternately, why extend these things at all? Laws are not uniform among societies, no matter how small we define the section we are examining.
There are plenty of actions which are not punishable by law, yet are considered in poor taste or irresponsible. Even if they are the inevitable offshoots of certain freedoms i.e. freedom of speech (within limitations), they are not condoned at large. That's one of the tradeoffs of living in a modern democratic society.
On January 09 2015 10:12 Holy_AT wrote: Why not arrest someone who was guilty of hate speech and release him after some psychology sessions or until he has seen the light of day? When he has proven that his ideology has sufficiently changed and that he recognizes the error in his ways?
The proper euphemism for that is 're-education'. That is not an ethical application of psychology.
On January 09 2015 08:44 Holy_AT wrote: ....I mean okay they may not have yet committed a terrorist attack (before their attack of course), but their mindset and their ideas were a threat and not in accord with the European mindset....
....It has to stand for freedom of thought....
I think you need to think this through a little more...
No I think you have to give it more thoughts. For example freedom of religion and combating fundamentalism are not exclusive.
You seem to be of the opinion that there should be no exception to what ideologies should be harbored in Europe. You seem to think that it is a good idea that there are people with fundamentalists thought or fascist thoughts in Europe living free to do what ever they want?
In my opinion a line has to be drawn here. Europe can not become a harbor for the ideas of fundamentalists and other despicable ideologies all under the guise of freedom of thought or religious freedom. Freedom of thought yes, as long as they are not against the main ideas of enlightenment and rationalism. Giving freedom of thought to religious fundamentalists or fascist who oppose this very idea is just wrong.
This is just xenophobic thinking branded, poorly, as being about the protection of the majority and enlightenment.
Please explain what is xenophobic on the idea of outlawing fascism and religious fundamentalists? It is the extremists and the agitators that must be opposed not the normal people who go about their everyday lives. I don't care if they go to church or a temple if they eat pork/cow don't eat pork/cow if they thing people should wear spaghetti hats or the burka, unless they want to enforce their ideas.
I mean take Neville Chamberlain he did more or less nothing to oppose the fascism in Germany Austria and Italy. It needed men like Churchill who knew how dangerous that ideology was long before others did to oppose it.
They do not think like me. Therefore they are all criminals.
That thought alone is how you completely destroy society as we know it. Once you make one thought illegal, as "noble" as that might be or seem at the time you've just signed your own death warrant. We've cleaned all those Islamists up, now how about those pesky fundamental Christians. We got those, now how about we take out those conservatives with their crazy thoughts? Things are pretty swell with those conservatives gone, we really should get rid of those lefties that aren't quite lefty enough for our liking. You've opened the floor gates to lock up anyone for crimes that don't exist. Who decides what is next on the list?
I'm personally against all religion across the board. Surely for me it would be better if all religious people were thrown in prison! That would help my personal opinions and get rid of some truly dangerous and insidious people out there, Muslim and Christian alike! Surely I have as much or more reason to be of your mind here than you do. But I'm able to look past my own short sightedness and see that a system like that has nothing to do with freedom in any sense of the word.
"I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."
If they commit a crime imprison them for the crime. Don't make up a crime for which to imprison them. There is no justice in any society which would do that for any reason.
On January 09 2015 09:48 Holy_AT wrote: Giving freedom of thought to [anybody] who opposes this very idea is just wrong.
I'm gonna stop you there (jumping on the bandwagon with everyone else).
Freedom of thought means you can think whatever you like about anything. That is what it means to be a free society. Freedom of speech is a means of ensuring this, and is limited in pragmatic ways (e.g. no incitement to violence).
If Choudary (or anybody else) incites violence, he should be imprisoned. As it is, he is doubtless under every imaginable kind of surveillance and can hardly get involved with terrorist activity. And if he ever slips up, he'll be in jail instantly. But if he ponders stupid ideas about oppressive laws, I don't think we should lock him up any more than I think we should lock up people who propose a thought police. And if his crime is not condemning violence? It's easy to imagine how that gets twisted into a way to oppress people: imagine if every person who refused to condemn the violence of say, Nelson Mandela, or Malcolm X, or John Brown was locked up.
its obvious that Holy_AT maintains an unpopular and dangerous opinion that has been derided by almost every subsequent poster. shouldnt we arrest him and reeducate him? its what he wants after all.
So why not extend these things and arrest people who come back from fighting their war in Syria or promote that the Sharia should be the law of the land?
Well, coming back from fighting a war in Syria is very different than promoting Sharia for the law of the land. For instance, what were they doing in Syria? If war crimes/ terrorist activities, then sure arrest them. I don't see it important to throw people in jail for expressing their desire for Sharia law in my country. They can express that desire all they want. I see no reason to accomodate that desire- especially the capital punishment parts. But they can express it.
also what is locking people like Choudary up going to accomplish? You can't lock ideas up. If anything he will become more respected among the people that already follow his nonsense. All you can do is show young Muslims that what he's saying is just insane. Turning this guy into a martyr is only going to help him.
On January 09 2015 10:33 dAPhREAk wrote: its obvious that Holy_AT maintains an unpopular and dangerous opinion that has been derided by almost every subsequent poster. shouldnt we arrest him and reeducate him? its what he wants after all.
you can imagine how often my trigger finger gets itchy, but alas i must allow people to have different and arguably terrible opinions to some extent
On January 09 2015 10:33 dAPhREAk wrote: its obvious that Holy_AT maintains an unpopular and dangerous opinion that has been derided by almost every subsequent poster. shouldnt we arrest him and reeducate him? its what he wants after all.
you can imagine how often my trigger finger gets itchy, but alas i must allow people to have different and arguably terrible opinions to some extent
completely off topic, but when i wrote that message i was thinking "and we can send him to kespa jail with lichter." but i didnt think anyone would get the joke. i guess you are reading my mind. confirmed thinkpol!!!
A big portion of society not only are uninformed about alot of matters, they also hold very bland blanketed ignorant opinions on alot of things. This is one of the problems that is simply a side effect from the globalizing earth, people can't keep track of what's going on, so they overgeneralize. People forget an individualistic approach is needed. Yes people fall through the cracks, stuff like this happens, but we learn from it, we better our system, we weed out the bad seeds.. even if it takes time. I have alot of hope, but also alot of despair. People can do amazing things, and this must be protected at all costs. But protecting this without crossing a certai ethical line is going to be a very delicate issue, with decades, maybe even centuries of integration, slow decay of ideologies, whether religious or political. But in the meantime, toward this unification I can only dream of, alot of infuriating and destructive actions will come along the way. Let's just hope we don't get distracted by these things along the way and just try to move forward.
To be honest. We've made alot of progress as humans towards living together in peace, through various of huge projects, but we're still in the very beginning. Again, mixed feelings here, because we get to see the very start of actual civil humanity but we'll never see the endproduct of our struggles these last and upcoming centuries. Let's hope we get to global unification instead of global distress.
Sorry for this kind of tangent maybe? But actions like this are just telling us we're still only beginning to realize everything in this world which is happening is grey (or multifaceted, depends on your sense of cynism or optimism I guess) instead of black and white.
The fucking cowardice of my nation's media outlet:
"The cartoons are already online so there's no point in us publishing them." What an absolute cop out and pathetic excuse. These cartoonists died for freedom of speech and this is how the director of journalist standards respects them, by shrinking behind political correctness. The police officer he describes being executed was a Muslim himself who died protecting these cartoonists and what they stand for in a secular society. At least the Quebecois media have a spine to stand up with.
Anjem Choudhary is not someone you want to listen to. The guy is a radical hate preacher. One time before an interview was performed, he did a sound check in which he recited "9/11. 7/11." Guy is a fucking lunatic. I'm actually kinda pissed that they put that some news channels put that guy on the air because some people may assume that he represents a majority Muslim position when he's been routinely criticized by fellow scholars.
Also popped in here to say that I support the French people in their time of struggle. Really really awful time, sort of reminds me of the Boston bombings so I can see how fearful people can be.
On January 09 2015 14:11 Housemd wrote: Just wanted to clarify something
Anjem Choudhary is not someone you want to listen to. The guy is a radical hate preacher. One time before an interview was performed, he did a sound check in which he recited "9/11. 7/11." Guy is a fucking lunatic. I'm actually kinda pissed that they put that some news channels put that guy on the air because some people may assume that he represents a majority Muslim position when he's been routinely criticized by fellow scholars.
Also popped in here to say that I support the French people in their time of struggle. Really really awful time, sort of reminds me of the Boston bombings so I can see how fearful people can be.
That's why they put him on. Also why he is rarely if ever seen sharing the screen with Muslims.
On January 09 2015 10:33 dAPhREAk wrote: its obvious that Holy_AT maintains an unpopular and dangerous opinion that has been derided by almost every subsequent poster. shouldnt we arrest him and reeducate him? its what he wants after all.
you can imagine how often my trigger finger gets itchy, but alas i must allow people to have different and arguably terrible opinions to some extent
And this is why freedom is great and horrible.
But regardless of whether you "disallow/allow" freedoms of others you need to realize everyone is free to do what they wish. It is a basic of all human life, any person anywhere can decide they want to attack someone for any reason and the society they live in can exercise their freedom to punish that individual. What makes a law a law is the society you're in.
When societies change or clash against each other you see massive conflicts within them. People wanting different laws always causes casualties. The only thing that you can do is have constructive, intelligent, and critically thinking conversation. Locking up the "unwanted/minority" voices does nothing but show you fear those people's words. The easiest way to start a revolt is oppressing people. “When a man is denied the right to live the life he believes in, he has no choice but to become an outlaw.” -Nelson Mandella
Small steps in conversation/thought work best. Insults never lead to anything but anger and anger leads to actions we've all seen too much of. Hatred and harming others does not change people but infuriates them. You can convince a friend much easier than an enemy. Reach out with kindness. "Am I not destroying my enemies when I make friends of them?" -Abraham Lincoln. (someone who understood issues within society better than most)
So we should respect this guy propaganda otherwise we are fascists? I see
You can disrespect, mock, satirize or better yet (in my opinion) simply disagree with that guy all you want. I disagree with almost everything he said. However, he's very careful in what he says- he never specifically condones the violence nor does he condemn it- he says many words in order to avoid condemning it. However, he committed no crime and there is no reason to throw him in prison. Not unless it could be proven he is doing something illegal like recruiting for terrorist organization. Freedom of belief and expression by its very nature has to allow for some very reprehensible beliefs.
(As an aside, he somehow linked in 'freedom from insult' when talking about freedom of expression. That's no freedom I've ever heard of.)
He only commited no crime because there are no laws against it. A law makes a crime not the doings of some person. For example if I was to parade in a Nazi uniform wearing the Hakenkreuz and making the Hitler Gruß in Austria all in the open I would get arrested and I would have broken the law and I would have committed a crime. The same would happen if I would publicly deny the Holocaust or do other despicable things.
So why not extend these things and arrest people who come back from fighting their war in Syria or promote that the Sharia should be the law of the land?
I mean their are enough laws against hate speech even in america the land of the free. I just think that it is wrong to only arrest them and release them without any thought behind it. Why not arrest someone who was guilty of hate speech and release him after some psychology sessions or until he has seen the light of day? When he has proven that his ideology has sufficiently changed and that he recognizes the error in his ways?
Wow it's funny because the people who always throws hitler and fascism everywhere are always the one who have actual fascist ideas. Inventing laws to criminalize people you don't agree with is precisely a fascist thing to do. You want to fight fascism if I understood you, but your ways to do it are exactly what the 3rd reich was doing.
And more and more people are like you, they throw the word hitler and fascist to everything they don't like and then propose incredibly freedom restricting measures to "fight" this supposed fascism. But the measures you propose are more fascist that everything the guys your accusing of fascism will ever be, I hope sometime people can understand that.
EPT
