Neo-Nazi's 10-year-old son charged with his murder

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

A 10-year-old boy charged with murdering his father at their home in California (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/california) was being exposed to his father's extreme neo-Nazi ideology of racism and violence at the time he allegedly turned a gun against him.
Evidence is mounting that Jeff Hall, 32, a white supremacist who led the National Socialist Movement in the south-west of the US, was involving his son in neo-Nazi activities before his death on 1 May.

A possible link between the group's violent messages and the shooting – an act exceptionally rare for a child as young as 10 – could be an important factor in the boy's trial.

Police were called to the Halls' home in Riverside, California, outside Los Angeles, shortly after 4am last Sunday, where they found Hall dead on a sofa. He had been shot with the family handgun.

Hall used his home as the headquarters of the NSM, one of America's largest and most influential neo-Nazi groups. A reporter for the New York Times witnessed Hall preaching race hatred at a meeting in front of the boy, his eldest of five children, a day before the shooting. Hall told the newspaper he was teaching the boy how to use a gun as well as night-vision gear and had given him a belt bearing Nazi SS insignia.

According to the Southern Poverty Law Centre, which monitors extreme right-wing groups, the NSM has a track record of recruiting very young children into its activities that surpasses that of any other organisation in the US. The party has created a children's wing called Viking Youth Corps, which is open to boys and girls with the proviso that they must be of European descent and the offspring of NSM members, or have their parents' consent.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/may/11/neo-nazi-son-charged-murder

That's incredibly sad in my opinion.

[Che a chara]

Part of me wants to say "good on 'em", but this could have serious detrimental effects for the kid for the rest of his life. He was being brainwashed into hate and he didn't really stand a chance growing up in that kind of environment and i do hope the justice system takes this into consideration.

[Octavian]

So did the kid kill his dad because of the messages his dad was giving him or because he disagreed with the messages?

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

At this time nothing is very clear I think. For all we know it could have been an accident.

That said, even if it was done in anger, the biggest thing I hope for is everything is taken into account. The mental stability of the child, the environment in which he was raised in, and above all that a 10 year old is very impressionable and that he's a fucking 10 year old.

It would be another crime if this kid ends up doing something along the lines of a life sentence in my opinion, though I am very curious to see the investigation into exactly what happened and led to him commiting this murder.

[hatzel]

Yeah. If you're going to have children, you should at least do the decent thing and raise them in an environment of love. We're all products of our upbringing, and something here suggests that when this child, having spent his formative years seemingly being exposed to hatred, rather than love, to the extent that he could turn a gun on his own father...well, I get the feeling that the damage has, unfortunately, already been done. It may prove difficult for him to come back from this, and turn his life around, all thanks to what seems, as first glance, to have been woefully inappropriate parenting...:(

Of course it may turn out there was no link, and perhaps this guy was a loving and caring father, but I refuse to believe that this child could have lived through 10 years with somebody who, according to the article, led the local Nazi movement, without ever being exposed to the hatred of that group, and it's easy to understand how such an environment would have a disastrous effect on a child's upbringing, irrespective of how the father interacted with and treated the child himself...

[ComradeMan]

Legally speaking it's difficult with a child of 10- whether or not he can be held responsible for his actions.

It's a very sad story all the same.

On a side note, how is it legal that these Nazis can recruit young children and brainwash them with hatred?

[a rebel]

You have to feel bad for the kid, but what would you do in that situation?

[RGacky3]

From what I've heard, some people are saying it was due to neglect, I doubt it had anything to do with his dads ideology.

[Viet Minh]

At this point the kid should just say his dad was gonna kill him, its not like any character witnesses for the prosecution will be taken very seriously.

[MattShizzle]

Indoctrinating kids into that sort of thing is child abuse.

[lines]

Well it's sad when everyone dies and that includes people who believe in stupid ideologies. I'm pretty sure the little kid did it by accident. There is a reason why gun owners are encouraged to keep their guns locked up somewhere in their house.

[Stranger Than Paradise]

This is horribly sad. No doubt this will have serious psychological consequences on the kid. Obviously his dad already had caused harm by bringing his kid up in a disgusting cult.

[graffic]

The main issue here is not that his father was a nazi. There are loads of nutcases who believe in stupid ideologies all over America and the world who still take their parenting duties seriously, or perhaps not in some cases.

This is just another example of how ridiculous and primitive America's gun laws are. They are ripe for reform

[#FF0000]

This is just another example of how ridiculous and primitive America's gun laws are. They are ripe for reform

How?

[piet11111]

On a side note, how is it legal that these Nazis can recruit young children and brainwash them with hatred?

Haven't you heard ? children are property :rolleyes:

[TheLeftStar]

So sad the Neo-Nazi got killed by his son. A sad day for National Socialist Movement :(

[hatzel]

Haven't you heard ? children are property :rolleyes:

I vaguely remember something somebody said sometime, I think it was maybe even Tucker, something along the lines of 'until a child reaches majority, it remains the property of its parent. If a parent wishes to cast their child into a fire, one cannot prevent them from doing so, as this would be an affront to their freedom to do with their property as they please'...really? Even Tucker wouldn't have said something that stupid, would he? Maybe it was some doolally liberal back in the day, or somebody saying it to mock or attack somebody's position. Still...yeah! Throw your kids in a fire or something...:confused:

[brigadista]

sound like something else was going on too

[Le Libérer]

This child is a product of his environment. I'm sure if hes been raised to use violence with hate, it was only a natural progression. Havent we all hated our parents at some point in our childhood?

[Jazzratt]

This child is a product of his environment. I'm sure if hes been raised to use violence with hate, it was only a natural progression. Havent we all hated our parents at some point in our childhood? If you oppose raising children with violence then you are a western chauvanist. :rolleyes:

[Tenka]

How?

Obviously if the father had a gun as well, he would have been able to fight back against his unruly ten-year-old son; that's why you can never have enough guns in free circulation.

lol jk.
I feel sorry for the kid being raised in such an environment, and I hope there aren't any serious judicial repercussions for him; but on a personal note, the only good nazi is a dead nazi.

[PhoenixAsh]

If you oppose raising children with violence then you are a western chauvanist. :rolleyes:

I have heard that apparantly when you do not take a baseball bat to the little f*-ers they will just never turn out right....:redstar2000:

*****


I have missed the story after the initial thread. Why was the kid charged? He is tenb. Did they do a psych evaluation? Is there evidence this is premeditated or intentional?

[#FF0000]

So sad the Neo-Nazi got killed by his son. A sad day for National Socialist Movement :(

lol what

[Ele'ill]

I found the conversation in the other thread about this as well as personal conversations surrounding it to be odd- regardless of the father's 'political involvement' - had this child killed them-self the sympathetic uproar would have been slightly more significant where as the current element of autonomous self-defense is a 'no-go'.

[Texas Expat]

Killed him on May Day, did he? How ironic. Can't say I will mourn the dad, but I do feel sorry for the boy. It will take a lot before he can live a semblance of a normal life, if that's even possible.

[Tik-Tok]

I do believe this is a very bias article.

Though I do not approve of certain white supremacist groups, it is not illegal nor should it be illegal. These people don't commit crime and harm noone. They have views and that is all. If people in this thread believe it is wrong to bring up a child in such a way I should ask if the opposite is true? Is it OK to bring up a child under an extreme left ideology yet not OK to bring one up in an extreme right ideology. Though it really isn't right wing. Such ideologies tend to work in different forms.

They aren't called ''National Socialists'' for nothing.

I would also like to point out that the shooting and the mans affiliations probably didn't have a connection. These things happen in all sorts of enviroments. It's sad but unless you know the full story, I doubt we can ever fully know what happened.

[Crux]

Surely I can't be the only one appaled just at the fact that they are charging a 10-year old with murder?

[hatzel]

I do believe this is a very bias article.

Okay, hi.


Though I do not approve of certain white supremacist groups
I'd much prefer it if you didn't approve of any, but whatever...


These people don't commit crime and harm noone.Hah, you're funny...


They have views and that is all.Views, yes. Abhorrent views. And yet more abhorrent actions, as it turns out.


If people in this thread believe it is wrong to bring up a child in such a way I should ask if the opposite is true? Is it OK to bring up a child under an extreme left ideology yet not OK to bring one up in an extreme right ideology.I've heard rumours of abuse. And hatred. And hatred realised through violence. The 'political' views behind that really don't make any difference.


Though it really isn't right wing.Yet more comedy, you should do stand-up!


They aren't called ''National Socialists'' for nothing.True. It's nothing to do with their being socialists, though.


I would also like to point out that the shooting and the mans affiliations probably didn't have a connection.Yeah, his affiliations probably had little if any impact, as I doubt the kid was politically aware enough to know about any of that. His parenting? Well, there's something we could argue might have been connected, even if just to the extent of...well, he let his kid get his hands on a gun. Good parents generally make sure that doesn't happen.


It's sadIndeed.

Done, kthnxbye

[Tik-Tok]

I'd much prefer it if you didn't approve of any, but whatever...

It's free speech. I am sure there are many jewish, black, hispanic supremacist groups that exist and I have no problem with them either.


Hah, you're funny...
Well, in actual fact out of all extreme groups, they commit the least amount of crime. They mostly keep to themselves and thier small community.


Views, yes. Abhorrent views. And yet more abhorrent actions, as it turns out.

As I have said they mainly keep to themselves.


I've heard rumours of abuse. And hatred. And hatred realised through violence. The 'political' views behind that really don't make any difference.

Rumours? That doesn't mean anything. Hard facts, evidence. As long as they don't commit crime, thier views are not a problem.


Yet more comedy, you should do stand-up!

There isn't a simple left and right. It's far broader than that. He seems to be a white supremacist but his politcla views could be different.


True. It's nothing to do with their being socialists, though.
Well it is. They are ''National'' ''Socialist.'' It's a strange ideology mixed with nationalism and corporatism. They still nationalize industry ver ymuch like the communists yet the difference is commmunists break down class while national socialists maintain it. Both are still very very similar in practice.


Yeah, his affiliations probably had little if any impact, as I doubt the kid was politically aware enough to know about any of that. His parenting? Well, there's something we could argue might have been connected, even if just to the extent of...well, he let his kid get his hands on a gun. Good parents generally make sure that doesn't happen.
Yes... they should never have left such a weapon out in the open but we don't know the full facts.

[Ele'ill]

Though I do not approve of certain white supremacist groups,



Though I do not approve of certain white supremacist groups,



Though I do not approve of certain white supremacist groups,



Though I do not approve of certain white supremacist groups,

Which white supremacist groups do you approve of?

[Tik-Tok]

My approval comes in the fact that they don't commit crime. If they have thier views, I have no problem. Groups which actively commit crime, I do have a problem with. There in lies my approval. For instance many groups just discuss or get together to celebrate thier identity very much like many racial groups. There is a difference between Pride groups and Supremacist groups. This is something which the media and many people confuse.

It's a view. That is all it is.

[Ele'ill]

My approval comes in the fact that they don't commit crime.

White supremacism isn't responsible for crimes?



If they have thier views, I have no problem.

They act on them.



Groups which actively commit crime, I do have a problem with. There in lies my approval. For instance many groups just discuss or get together to celebrate thier identity very much like many racial groups.

I think the difference here is that those other groups get together to celebrate specific cultural/regional events where as 'white pride' bone-head losers get together because their skin is white and to advocate genocide.



There is a difference between Pride groups and Supremacist groups. This is something which the media and many people confuse.

Are you suggesting that 'White Pride' doesn't equate to, in any of those people's minds who partake in related activity, 'White Supremacy'? :rolleyes:

[Crux]

White supremacist groups are built around violent attacks. NSM are certainly no exception. Are we being visited by a Stormfronter perhaps?

[Ele'ill]

White supremacist groups are built around violent attacks. NSM are certainly no exception. Are we being visited by a Stormfronter perhaps?

Clearly, it's like they set up one of their stupid booths where they back peddle out of every action and ounce of ideological shite they've liberally spit into the public realm. "No no, all that bad shit, that's not us, we don't even know what we are now, see we're nice"

[Tik-Tok]

White supremacism isn't responsible for crimes? They act on them.

They are very unlikely to act upon them.


I think the difference here is that those other groups get together to celebrate specific cultural/regional events where as 'white pride' bone-head losers get together because their skin is white and to advocate genocide.

No they don't. Thats a fairly racist thing to say to assume that white people only join such groups to discuss murdering non-whites. I always found it strange that people approve of non-white pride groups yet white pride groups are seen as negative. The idea that they group together to murder is ludicrous and utterly false.


Are you suggesting that 'White Pride' doesn't equate to, in any of those people's minds who partake in related activity, 'White Supremacy'? :rolleyes:

Again, having pride in ones race does not mean a lack of respect for other cultures and racial groups. I'm not even a white pride advocater but I like to browse many forums with different and odd views. You seem to be very nieve in your image of pride groups.

Unless you want to arrest people for thoughtcrime, I dont see how it is a problem.

[Tik-Tok]

White supremacist groups are built around violent attacks. NSM are certainly no exception. Are we being visited by a Stormfronter perhaps?

Supremacist is not the same as Pride.

And no I am not a Stormfronter.

[Ele'ill]

They are very unlikely to act upon them.

The KKK hasn't? Nazi's haven't targeted anyone?



Again, having pride in ones race does not mean a lack of respect for other cultures and racial groups. I'm not even a white pride advocater but I like to browse many forums with different and odd views. You seem to be very nieve in your image of pride groups.

White pride is white supremacy and those involved advocate the removal of other cultures.

Which white supremacist groups do you support? You haven't answered this yet.


Unless you want to arrest people for thoughtcrime, I dont see how it is a problem.

When someone proves you wrong you don't repeat the same question again. That makes you look sillier than if you had just said 'I'm here trolling from another forum'.

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

The KKK hasn't? Nazi's haven't targeted anyone?

The KKK and Nazis are examples of supremecist groups that have committed loads of violence but those are not all the groups. There are even modern klan gatherings in which anyone espousing violence is immediately removed and the leaders strongly come out saying "it's about pride in our heritage, not hatred of others."

Is it fucking stupid? Yes, but your argument is like How can you say communism can work? Did the Soviet Union work? Yeah, thats right.

[Tik_Tok]

The KKK hasn't? Nazi's haven't targeted anyone

I dont think comparing The Nazis and the KKK to some modern grass roots white pride community is very fair. Also the KK itself isn't one simple group. There were many many clans and If I cna recall correctly, one clan had a large portion of black clan members. This may sound strange but at the time it made sense. Many people still believed in segregation and both black and white segregationist groups would get along very well.


White pride is white supremacy and those involved advocate the removal of other cultures.

This is false. White Pride is nothing more than the exact thing you mentioned earlier. It is the celebration of ones cultural heritage. All races and cultures have a history, both bad and good. The celebration of such an idea is does not mean that they give a negative impression of other groups.


Which white supremacist groups do you support? You haven't answered this yet.

Support is not the same as approval. I specifically stated I approve of any group as long as they don't commit crime. I disappove of those that do and call for physical violence on others.


When someone proves you wrong you don't repeat the same question again. That makes you look sillier than if you had just said 'I'm here trolling from another forum'.

I don't understand this at all. Have I wrong you somehow?

I am here genuinely to discuss topics. I am in a specifc part of the forum allocated for people with my views. I am not a facist, I am a right leaning libertarian. This ideology involves freedoms both socially and economically. I'm about as far from a national socialist as you can get.

So I'd like to ask very nicely to let me remian to talk with people of different views. This is what I like to do. Im not here to annoy or to troll. Im just here to discuss and to talk. I'm quite polite. Thnak you for having me.

[Tik_Tok]

My issue with communism as well as national socialism is the fact that it is inherently corruptable and will always lead to tyranny. It best to have as small government as possible.

[Ele'ill]

The KKK and Nazis are examples of supremecist groups that have committed loads of violence but those are not all the groups. There are even modern klan gatherings in which anyone espousing violence is immediately removed and the leaders strongly come out saying "it's about pride in our heritage, not hatred of others."


Is it fucking stupid? Yes, but your argument is like How can you say communism can work? Did the Soviet Union work? Yeah, thats right.

And what is their heritage that they're proud of and want to relive in the form of 'klan meetings'? Spare me this broken analogy. :rolleyes:

[#FF0000]

My issue with communism as well as national socialism is the fact that it is inherently corruptable and will always lead to tyranny. It best to have as small government as possible.

Everything can be corrupted.

But I'm not sure how an ideology that is all about this weird, strictly hierarchical, racial nationalism can be anything but corrupt.

[Tik_Tok]

And what is their heritage that they're proud of and want to relive in the form of 'klan meetings'? Spare me this broken analogy. :rolleyes:

You are using a machine, a language and many other different tools which are part of that heritage. Most of western society and its freedoms are also part of that heritage. The good goes with the bad. I don't get how you can see why other races can have a pride in cultural heritage yet whites cannot.

It's simply a community of similar thinkers. People who want to talk, hang, discuss perhaps even date people who have similar backgrounds etc. In a way there is much to proud of and other things to feel ashamed of. All cultures have ups and downs and bad history they would like to forget.

[Tik_Tok]

Everything can be corrupted.

But I'm not sure how an ideology that is all about this weird, strictly hierarchical, racial nationalism can be anything but corrupt.

Both National Socialism and communism are corrupt because of the power they wield. That was one of the specific warnings the founding fathers gave centuries ago. It is not diffuclt to see patterns. Both extreme authoritarian ideologies have been responsible for many deaths. This is why government should enver wield such power and the people must never let them.

[Ele'ill]

You are using a machine, a language and many other different tools which are part of that heritage. Most of western society and its freedoms are also part of that heritage. The good goes with the bad. I don't get how you can see why other races can have a pride in cultural heritage yet whites cannot.

It's simply a community of similar thinkers. People who want to talk, hang, discuss perhaps even date people who have similar backgrounds etc. In a way there is much to proud of and other things to feel ashamed of. All cultures have ups and downs and bad history they would like to forget.



Though I do not approve of certain white supremacist groups

You support white supremacist groups.

"White supremacy is the belief, and promotion of the belief, that white people are superior to people of other racial backgrounds. The term is sometimes used specifically to describe a political ideology that advocates the social and political dominance by whites."


Which white supremacist groups do you support?

[#FF0000]

You are using a machine, a language and many other different tools which are part of that heritage. Most of western society and its freedoms are also part of that heritage. The good goes with the bad.

That doesn't mean we should celebrate the bad, though.


I don't get how you can see why other races can have a pride in cultural heritage yet whites cannot.People can have pride in being italian or irish or german or whatever. That is not White Pride, though.

I wouldn't even say White Pride and Black Pride are analogous either. Black Pride is more about attacking negative stereotypes. White Pride is about preserving privilege.


Both National Socialism and communism are corrupt because of the power they wield. That was one of the specific warnings the founding fathers gave centuries ago. It is not diffuclt to see patterns. Both extreme authoritarian ideologies have been responsible for many deaths. This is why government should enver wield such power and the people must never let them.


I don't think you know what communists actually believe.

[Tik_Tok]

You support white supremacist groups.

"White supremacy is the belief, and promotion of the belief, that white people are superior to people of other racial backgrounds. The term is sometimes used specifically to describe a political ideology that advocates the social and political dominance by whites."


Which white supremacist groups do you support?

I can't exactly name groups from the top of my head. I merely stated and I shall repeat for the third time that I approve of any group....ANY... that doesn't commit crime. They have a right to free speech and I shall protect that right regardless if I dislike what they are saying.

As I said before there is a fundamental difference between pride and supremacy.

Does that answer your question?

[#FF0000]

As I said before there is a fundamental difference between pride and supremacy.Yeah and there's a difference between sincerity and bullshit.

And sticking up for freedom of speech doesn't mean you can't think some speech is abhorrent.

[Sasha]

So I'd like to ask very nicely to let me remian to talk with people of different views. This is what I like to do. Im not here to annoy or to troll. Im just here to discuss and to talk. I'm quite polite. Thnak you for having me.

no, banned again

[#FF0000]

Can we let him be a punching bag for a little while longer?

[Ele'ill]

I can't exactly name groups from the top of my head. I merely stated and I shall repeat for the third time that I approve of any group....ANY... that doesn't commit crime. They have a right to free speech and I shall protect that right regardless if I dislike what they are saying.

As I said before there is a fundamental difference between pride and supremacy.

Does that answer your question?

So you support all groups even conflicting ideological groups so long as they don't use violence? That's not the same as 'supporting free speech'. That's kind of silly. You said you approve of (support) certain white supremacist groups- now you can't remember which ones you were thinking of when you wrote that? :rolleyes:

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

And what is their heritage that they're proud of and want to relive in the form of 'klan meetings'? Spare me this broken analogy. :rolleyes:

A heritage that is well over a century old and has come to represent antebellum values, not white supremacy, for many people. Has there been violence and hatred commited in the past? Yes, but as long as these groups don't espouse that or a return of slavery/segregation then there really is little difference between that and a biker gang for all practical purposes.

Again, you argued that all these groups are obviously violent and the Nazis and KKK prove this. Which is a ridiculous, strawman argument that can be applied to the far left as well.

I'm not saying I agree with their ideology in any way whatsoever, just that they do, indeed, exist.

[#FF0000]

antebellum values, not white supremacy

Real talk, I have a very hard time separating the two. You can be all about being a right and proper "southern gentleman" without literally joining an organization that literally killed people because they were black.

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

So you support all groups even conflicting ideological groups so long as they don't use violence? That's not the same as 'supporting free speech'. That's kind of silly. You said you approve of (support) certain white supremacist groups- now you can't remember which ones you were thinking of when you wrote that? :rolleyes:

Are you purposefully trying to miss his point?

[Tik Tok]

Ok, Im following the rules. Im in the part of the forum allocated for opposing views. Im polite and I'm not a facist. Im not spreading hate nor flaming etc.

Can I at least ask why I am being banned? I honestly don't get it. I ahve posted in all sorts of forums and seem to get along well with many differt views even the communist forums.

Why can't I post here?

[hatzel]

Why can't I post here?

Because you're one of those white pride worldwide types and that totally sucks :)

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

Real talk, I have a very hard time separating the two. You can be all about being a right and proper "southern gentleman" without literally joining an organization that literally killed people because they were black.

Not only blacks, but also civil rights workers of all stripes, as well as many minorities for no justifiable reason whatsoever.

But I am saying that many people who join these groups today do not do so because they want to kill black folks, and as long as they are not espousing violence against anybody I, like Tik-Tok, respect their right to peacefully gather though I myself find white pride absolutely stupid.

edit: Did I miss something? Did Tik-Tok say he was a white supremacist? Or is he being banned for merely suggesting that freedom of speech and assembly should exist?

[#FF0000]

But I am saying that many people who join these groups today do not do so because they want to kill black folks

They just want them to go away, though.


and as long as they are not espousing violence against anybody I, like Tik-Tok, respect their right to peacefully gather.

Oh, so do I. I also support the right of the community (not the government) to shout them down/keep them from gathering or organizing.

[Tik Tok]

That doesn't mean we should celebrate the bad, though. People can have pride in being italian or irish or german or whatever. That is not White Pride, though. I wouldn't even say White Pride and Black Pride are analogous either. Black Pride is more about attacking negative stereotypes. White Pride is about preserving privilege.

Don't you see the inherent racism behind that? Implying that whites gather to continue some sort of false dominance while black people only gather to disrupt sterotypes. Don't you see the inherent racism in your own argument?


I don't think you know what communists actually believe.

No, I do know. Thre are many types of communism. It's a fantastic idea but it falls apart in reality. I don't believe you want a totalitarian state but that is almost always what it leads to.

[Ele'ill]

Did Tik-Tok say he was a white supremacist?


Though I do not approve of certain white supremacist groups


This implies that they approve of certain white supremacist groups.

[hatzel]

Don't you see the inherent racism in your own argument?

There's nothing racist about not supporting the preservation of privilege for one race over all others. The opposite, in fact.

[#FF0000]

Don't you see the inherent racism behind that? Implying that whites gather to continue some sort of false dominance while black people only gather to disrupt sterotypes. Don't you see the inherent racism in your own argument?

Whites who gather under the banner of "White Pride" or "White Power" do organize to continue or further the very real dominance of white people in society. Like I said, people of european ethnicity can celebrate their cultural identity, and there's nothing wrong with that. But White Pride is about an entirely different identity altogether, which is an identity based on privilege.

And I didn't say black people only gather to disrupt stereotypes. I'm just saying that there is a difference to be about "white pride" in the United States and to be about Asian or Black or Brown pride.


No, I do know. Thre are many types of communism. It's a fantastic idea but it falls apart in reality. I don't believe you want a totalitarian state but that is almost always what it leads to. Why do you think that? Because going off the history, that's a pretty lazy way of looking at it.

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

They just want them to go away, though.

Obviously we're not talking about the same groups. There are literally white pride groups which meet on the second thursday of the month to put on a costume and talk about christian values and some such bullshit but make no mention of inciting racial hatred. Yes, there are the inevitable morons who believe white people are discriminated against in some quarters, but that's about as bad as it gets. I attended a meeting of a group in Charleston, sc, just because I wanted to see if the thing actually existed.

Bunch of fucking morons though, no doubt about that.


Oh, so do I. I also support the right of the community (not the government) to shout them down/keep them from gathering or organizing.

Wait....so if the community doesn't want someone around spreading what the community interprets as a hateful message we can stamp them out?

"I will tolerate no inciting of riots, no demonstrations against our government, no raising of the red flag of anarchy or any other move to destroy the peace and tranquility of our citizens and to make a mockery of the rights of peaceful assembly and free speeches guaranteed by our constitution. These people do not attempt to avail themselves of the constitutional guarantees; they deride them, mock at them, use a pretense of privileges for wanton license of disorder. That we cannot tolerate —not in Seattle"

Mayor Frank Edwards, pretty much justifying violent actions against commies (got very violent btw) on the same logic. Obviously he represented the government, which was only too happy to watch as non-government groups let loose, which is what you seem to imply by giving the communities the "right" to stamp out these groups. What are the police to do, sit idly by as mob justice is handed down?

Or....free speech is free speech is free speech.

http://depts.washington.edu/labhist/cpproject/ko.shtml

[#FF0000]

Obviously we're not talking about the same groups. There are literally white pride groups which meet on the second thursday of the month to put on a costume and talk about christian values and some such bullshit but make no mention of inciting racial hatred. Yes, there are the inevitable morons who believe white people are discriminated against in some quarters, but that's about as bad as it gets. So why do this as the KKK? Sorry, I don't buy that people who don't see anything wrong with using that name aren't also racist as fuck.


Mayor Frank Edwards, pretty much justifying violent actions against commies (got very violent btw) on the same logic.Mayor. As in a representative of the government.

Are you saying that you don't think it's right for the working class to organize against its enemies? I don't understand what the objection is here.

[Ele'ill]

Obviously we're not talking about the same groups. There are literally white pride groups which meet on the second thursday of the month to put on a costume and talk about christian values and some such bullshit but make no mention of inciting racial hatred. Yes, there are the inevitable morons who believe white people are discriminated against in some quarters, but that's about as bad as it gets.

And as you said earlier here,


There are even modern klan gatherings in which..

Why organize under the same banners responsible for murders, hatred, exclusion etc.. if there is no relation to the proposed working systems of genocide and racism advocated?

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

So why do this as the KKK? Sorry, I don't buy that people who don't see anything wrong with using that name aren't also racist as fuck.

Um, the organization is inherently racist though, I mean, it's still a white pride group albeit a peacful one.

I'm not arguing that they're not disgusting and reactionary, just that there are groups that, despite being comprised of racists, don't advocate violence and I feel fine about their rights being respected as such.


Are you saying that you don't think it's right for the working class to organize against its enemies? I don't understand what the objection is here.

I'm saying that when you begin to bring up how communities can stamp out groups that are unpopular, a line has been crossed. Though the view (white pride that is) is seen as disgusting by just about everyone, the right to organize shouldn't be denied anyone who isn't advocating violence.

I should have put that quote in more context, though it was a revolutionary moment, what the socialists were fighting for was largely the acceptance of labor unions and workers rights we take for granted. Or, did, until we gave them all back in the last couple years buit that's a whole other discussion. Point being, advocating union membership at the time was seen as a revolutionary act that resulted in more than a couple commies getting lynched by extralegal means in the communities they were in.

Or you could look at the history of the American Legion and similar groups protecting their communities from the evil union people.

Free speech is free speech is free speech.

[#FF0000]

Um, the organization is inherently racist though, I mean, it's still a white pride group albeit a peacful one.

Oh.

Well okay, yeah that might be true. I doubt it'll be true once a group like that gets any kind of power, but okay.


Free speech is free speech is free speech.

Maybe I should be more specific? I think it's a-okay for the working class to organize against groups like the KKK and the nazis who want to organize or demonstrate.

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

Why organize under the same banners responsible for murders, hatred, exclusion etc.. if there is no relation to the proposed working systems of genocide and racism advocated?

I don't know, but people do it nonetheless.

Really I am not the person to try and explain that ideology because it makes no sense to me whatsoever, I am just writing about one example I saw of such a thing in practice.

[Ele'ill]

I don't know, but people do it nonetheless.

No guesses?

[TikTok]

Because you're one of those white pride worldwide types and that totally sucks :)

No I am not and I wouldn't see why that would be a problem but fair enough. Quite hypocritial from someone who has a the star of david as a profile picture.

This is a board specifically catered for people like me. Why would you come here to tell me I cannot? You call yourself a libertarian socialist. I am a libertarian conservative. I believe in both economic and social freedom.

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

Oh.

Well okay, yeah that might be true. I doubt it'll be true once a group like that gets any kind of power, but okay.

I don't fear that to be honest, though such a thing would be horrific for sure. But hey unlike the current southern politicians who practically go all the way to 'seig heil' in their populist, tea-parting frenzies they'd at least be honest about it and not act all offended when they're called out as a racist pig.

The art of the southern republican politician is in the euphemisms.


Maybe I should be more specific? I think it's a-okay for the working class to organize against groups like the KKK and the nazis who want to organize or demonstrate.

Oh well yes absolutely, if there isn't a larger counter-demonstration to these things then it would be just as disturbing as the demonstration itself imo.

[TikTok]

Why do I keep getting banned?

Honestly. I just dont get it. Why make an opposing views forum then ban people who use it when it specifically designed for this very purpose. I have not broken any rules.

[Ele'ill]

This is a board specifically catered for people like me.

You approve of white supremacy :rolleyes:

[Red Future]

it's still a white pride group albeit a peacful one.

Funniest thing Ive heard all week

[#FF0000]

No I am not and I wouldn't see why that would be a problem but fair enough. Quite hypocritial from someone who has a the star of david as a profile picture.

Have you ignored everything I said about white pride?

[TikTok]

You approve of white supremacy :rolleyes:

I approve of free speech. Thier views of supremacy are odd but nothing to worry about. You can keep labelling me whatever you wish. I follow the rules and I am polite. Your only justification for banning me is simply disliking my viewpoint.

I approve of free speech. I am not a supremacist and would not like to see white supremacists in government. Government should not support any specific race as it is not its role. Neither should it infringe on the lbierty of the population.

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

No guesses?

I know what you think, and there certainly are quite a few violence espousing lunatic groups out there, and thank's to organizations like Southern Poverty Law Center they are more and more held accountable when a follower commits an act of violence.

But there are also groups who, it seems to me, are more angry about the federal govt than any race though that also makes no sense to me. In the one meeting I went to, for example, there was more lambasting of the IRS, William Tecumseh Sherman, and supposed gun-control legislation than at minorities.

Again I think it's moronic but I'm just saying that if they're peaceful they should be allowed to live in their delusions without threat of violence.

And by the way, focusing on these groups isn't the big fight. I for one am much, MUCH more concerned about the widespread racism towards hispanics and mulsims that is taken for granted by many people. You don't need to go to a Klan meeting to see that manifest itself, that's for damn sure.

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

I approve of free speech. I am not a supremacist and would not like to see white supremacists in government. Government should not support any specific race as it is not its role. Neither should it infringe on the lbierty of the population.

In your opinion, does the Civil Rights Act of 1964 "infringe on the liberty of the population?"

[Ele'ill]

I approve of free speech. Thier views of supremacy are odd but nothing to worry about. You can keep labelling me whatever you wish. I follow the rules and I am polite. Your only justification for banning me is simply disliking my viewpoint.

I approve of free speech. I am not a supremacist and would not like to see white supremacists in government. Government should not support any specific race as it is not its role. Neither should it infringe on the lbierty of the population.


Irrelevant as you said-


Though I do not approve of certain white supremacist groups

Which implies that you approve of some white supremacist groups which implies that you approve of white supremacy. :rolleyes:

[TikTok]

Which implies that you support some white supremacist groups which implies that you support white supremacy.

That is an incredible conclusion you just made. My approval of free speech is somehow a negative? I also support islamic fndamentalist free speech and communist free speech.

Does that make me an islamic communist? Does that mean I appove of extreme religous movements and far left movements?

[#FF0000]

for such a staunch proponent of free speech you sure are awful at it.

[TikTok]

In your opinion, does the Civil Rights Act of 1964 "infringe on the liberty of the population?"

Yes but only parts of it. The segregation by government was wrong. Many libertarians completely disapprove of the government involvement of segregation. Public schools are just that, public. Therefore they shouldn't be segregated. This goes for all public systems. Other parts I dislike for the very reason I dislike the Jim Crow laws. They bend the constitution and these laws and rules take on a life of thier own.

The Civil Rights Act was a good idea on paper but in pracitce it took on a life of its own. People don't think of the consequences.

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

That is an incredible conclusion you just made. My approval of free speech is somehow a negative? I also support islamic fndamentalist free speech and communist free speech.

Does that make me an islamic communist? Does that mean I appove of extreme religous movements and far left movements?


You could have worded it better, Mariel drew a conclusion based on how you worded it which did, indeed, leave open whether or not you support some white supremacist groups.

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

Yes but only parts of it. The segregation by government was wrong. Many libertarians completely disapprove of the government involvement of segregation. Public schools are just that, public. Therefore they shouldn't be segregated. This goes for all public systems. Other parts I dislike for the very reason I dislike the Jim Crow laws. They bend the constitution and these laws and rules take on a life of thier own.

The Civil Rights Act was a good idea on paper but in pracitce it took on a life of its own. People don't think of the consequences.

I am having a hard time visualizing what you mean, do you have some examples about how the negative effects of the civil rights act?

edit: forgive me just realized you were British. Do you believe the rhetoric about 'multi-culturalism' having failed?

Actually, forget that. What the fuck is multi-culturalism? I ask because in the states obviously we have quite a few different cultures but for british people it has some weird connotation. Is it some ideology, or is it really just what it sounds like, some people want to integrate different cultures into society while others want to keep the culture "pure?"

[Ele'ill]

That is an incredible conclusion you just made.

All I had to do was quote you. :rolleyes:

http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2111681&postcount=79

[Reznov]

This is really sad. I always get worked up on stories like this.

Why the fuck is a 10 year old being taught to use a gun in the first place? And how the hell does he get a hold of one so easy like that?

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

This is really sad. I always get worked up on stories like this.

Why the fuck is a 10 year old being taught to use a gun in the first place? And how the hell does he get a hold of one so easy like that?

I agree, but it also, in my opinion, ties in to the insane lack of gun control. Not only that, but any attempt is immediately branded as an attempt to, you know, enslave people.

I'm not saying the govt should take away guns (I love shooting...paying for ammo not so much) but holy shit Virginia Tech? Colombine? Tucson? All of these things happen and they become arguments against gun control. Because, you know, when someone starts shooting what we need is everyone else to begin shooting, especially people who have never been in a situation like that and probably aren't that proficient with the weapon (I no I sure as hell am not). It's their god given right.

Too bad this guy didn't have a gun to defend himself from his son. This is obviously because of gun control.

[TikT0k]

I am having a hard time visualizing what you mean, do you have some examples about how the negative effects of the civil rights act?

edit: forgive me just realized you were British. Do you believe the rhetoric about 'multi-culturalism' having failed?

Actually, forget that. What the fuck is multi-culturalism? I ask because in the states obviously we have quite a few different cultures but for british people it has some weird connotation. Is it some ideology, or is it really just what it sounds like, some people want to integrate different cultures into society while others want to keep the culture "pure?"

It's simply the neo liberals doign what they do best. Ballsing it all up. The incresed welfare created a need for more workers. The EUs lack of border control swept in a large immigrant population, some of which have either no skills at all or no connection to British culture. I live in London. Trust me.. I live here. Labour like most leftys like to brand anyone racist who is agaisnt such mass imigration even though it is fundamentally changing the country for the negative.

Some of you may not approve but you dont live here. 2.5 million unemployed and 3 million immigrants is not a coincidence.

I dont blame them. They wanted work and a better life and our government wanted to lower lower the wages so they can have a cheap labour force. It has failed rather epicly. The brits no longer work and are on welfare, the immigration has killed job flow, the rising public spending and debt has turned off investors and more and more companies are running to tax havens.

It failed...

[lines]

Mass immigration is a capitalist conspiracy to reduce the wages of the working classes. Another unfortunate result of mass immigration is the destruction of wildlife. The working classes need to make things better in their countries of origin. Mass immigration is a capitalist ploy of stifling the betterment of the society by encouraging people to leave where they are instead of making it better.

[#FF0000]

Mass immigration is a capitalist conspiracy to reduce the wages of the working classes. Another unfortunate result of mass immigration is the destruction of wildlife. The working classes need to make things better in their countries of origin. Mass immigration is a capitalist ploy of stifling the betterment of the society by encouraging people to leave where they are instead of making it better.

lol

[hatzel]

Don't worry, lines thinks everything's a conspiracy theory...guess who's to blame, guess! I prithee, guess! :lol:

[lines]

OK lets put it another way: the synergistic effects of the capitalist social enterprise is one where mass immigration is encouraged in order to reduce the wages of the workers and sabotage their ability to collectively bargain effectively due to a ultra-big labor pool of unskilled workers. In the earlier post the word conspiracy was used in a figurative sense rather than literal ;)

[Tactic]

Mass immigration is a capitalist conspiracy to reduce the wages of the working classes. Another unfortunate result of mass immigration is the destruction of wildlife. The working classes need to make things better in their countries of origin. Mass immigration is a capitalist ploy of stifling the betterment of the society by encouraging people to leave where they are instead of making it better.

I like you. :thumbup1:

Anyone who thinks otherwise needs to double check the numbers. Britain is a perfect example of this.

[hatzel]

I like you. :thumbup1:

Judging by some of the shit I've seen lines posting, I'm not at all surprised...

[agnixie]

Judging by some of the shit I've seen lines posting, I'm not at all surprised...

Why does everything I read from lines makes me think "stormfront" >.>

[PhoenixAsh]

I get what you are saying...but unfortunately nazi's are not all low IQ induviduals.
Nor would I like a government or independent agency deciding who gets to have kids and who doesn't based on government regulated statutes.

[Jazzratt]

Mass immigration is a capitalist conspiracy to reduce the wages of the working classes. Another unfortunate result of mass immigration is the destruction of wildlife. The working classes need to make things better in their countries of origin. Mass immigration is a capitalist ploy of stifling the betterment of the society by encouraging people to leave where they are instead of making it better.


OK lets put it another way: the synergistic effects of the capitalist social enterprise is one where mass immigration is encouraged in order to reduce the wages of the workers and sabotage their ability to collectively bargain effectively due to a ultra-big labor pool of unskilled workers. In the earlier post the word conspiracy was used in a figurative sense rather than literal ;)

Since you asked so nicely, yes you can be restricted. Have fun.

[#FF0000]

like manson said; everyone should have to take an IQ test before they have kids. hopefully it would filter out the nazi ****s like this guy.

That's a stupid thing you said. Stop saying stupid things like this.

[Ele'ill]

like manson said; everyone should have to take an IQ test before they have kids. hopefully it would filter out the nazi ****s like this guy.

Be careful what you wish for.

[red_rich]

like manson said; everyone should have to take an IQ test before they have kids. hopefully it would filter out the nazi ****s like this guy.

are you f*ing serious?

[Viet Minh]

Mass immigration is a capitalist conspiracy to reduce the wages of the working classes. Another unfortunate result of mass immigration is the destruction of wildlife. The working classes need to make things better in their countries of origin. Mass immigration is a capitalist ploy of stifling the betterment of the society by encouraging people to leave where they are instead of making it better.

To an extent I agree, 'mass' :rolleyes: immigration started in the UK as the working class began to unionise and labor movements grew in support. Afro-carribeans were invited in small numbers to fill job vacancies. I do not in any way begrudge any immigrant coming to a rich country (usually rich from profiteering the immigrant's resources ironically) but yes they were brought in as cheap labor, and essentially 'scabs'. I don't know how much of it is a conspiracy, or if it just works out that way when one nation has everything and another has nothing. However the answer is not to limit immigration the answer is to unionise across the board. The working classes of all nations (and races) need to stand together, and in solidarity with the proletariat across the World we need to force fair trade and workers rights.

[Jazzratt]

like manson said; everyone should have to take an IQ test before they have kids. hopefully it would filter out the nazi ****s like this guy. Oh goody. A fucking dickhead.

Fun fact: the word "****" alone was enough to win you an infraction. The fact your opinions are shit doesn't help either.