Lets welcome Nazi's

[vision]

Hi everyone

Im new to this community but I like its goals. I noticed that nazi belifs were banned from here. I'm in no way a nazi or suporter of anything along those lines but I think it devalues this site to rule out philosophy. nazi doctrine and the white supremacy that tends to go along with it are eaisly enough debunked and invalidated so why not let them post. I think it could help enlighten the misguided individuals who may be getting into that.

vision

[Karl Marx's Camel]

I see no problem with welcoming nazis to Opposing Ideologies. In fact, if I had the chance, I would welcome them. Most of them are just ignorant, and I see no reason for banning them when you can restrict them like everyone else who are anti-leftist. Capitalism kills millions of people every day. To grant supporters of capitalist liberalism more freedom than nazis, would be hypocricy; pseudo-leftist hypocricy influenced by bourgeois thought.

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

This site is hosted in Germany, and it would put Malte at legal risk if we allowed nazis, I believe.

[vision]

Interesting, I didnt know that. Well how about not specifically prohibiting them, that "no nazi trash" rule could go right?

[More Fire for the People]

Remember, we are not petty liberals, we are socialist and do not have to listen to the trash of the fascist if we don't want to.

[Led Zeppelin]

that "no nazi trash" rule could go right?

I sure hope not.

You are obviously a closet Nazi.

[The Feral Underclass]

Having Nazi's on this board is abolutely out the question. Yes it is true that the owner of the board could have legal problems if it was percieved to be open to Nazi's but more importantly this board is for revolutionary left wing discussion and we don't want people disrupting that or spouting hateful language.

[Individual]

Would you believe me if I said I was a Nazbol?

[vision]

I understand not wanting to hear that garbarge, really. but why not allow free speech and just eliminate nazi posts as off topic and or obsurd?
and to the guy who thinks I'm a closet nazi well you'd probably take that back if you knew i was a black jew, not joking. If you understand the free speech concept that allows this site to exist in many places you would be all for nazi's, the kkk, capitalists and child porn guys freedom of speech as I am

[eukreign]

Remember, we are not petty liberals, we are socialist and do not have to listen to the trash of the fascist if we don't want to.

That's nice, so I assume that means in a socialist society there is no freedom of speech?

[KC]

I understand not wanting to hear that garbarge, really. but why not allow free speech and just eliminate nazi posts as off topic and or obsurd?

There's a topic on this pinned at the top. This isn't a state, or a country. This is a privately owned domain. And whoever owns it can decide what they don't want to hear and ban whoever says it.



That's nice, so I assume that means in a socialist society there is no freedom of speech?

:lol: Yes, because in a private domain, because the owner doesn't allow hateful language, means that socialist societies are oppressive. Because you don't let nazis spew that shit in your house, you're oppressive too?


They can go talk that shit all they want. They have freedom of speech. They just can't do it here.

[Freedom Works]

There's a topic on this pinned at the top. This isn't a state, or a country. This is a privately owned domain. And whoever owns it can decide what they don't want to hear and ban whoever says it.

Wait a second, you have property rights, and I don't? Damn hypocrite.

[More Fire for the People]

Originally posted by [email protected] 13 2005, 02:56 PM

Remember, we are not petty liberals, we are socialist and do not have to listen to the trash of the fascist if we don't want to.

That's nice, so I assume that means in a socialist society there is no freedom of speech?
There would be no free speech for reactionaries.

[Decolonize The Left]

Look, if the owner of this sight could get in legal trouble, that stops the conversation. We all enjoy sharing our ideas here and so we should preserve this site by just sucking it up and dealing with it.

Personally, I'd let nazi trash post here, mainly becuase it's fun to listen to and easy to dismatle. But that's my opinion, and I'm fine with not having them here as well.

On the topic of free speech, this is a capitalist world. And in this capitalist world, people can privately own things, and make their own rules in regards to their territory, which is what happened here. To try and spin that into hypocrisy on the communists is stupid because like I said, this is capitalism, and whoever owns this site is following the rules. That simple. If he doesn't want Nazis posting their shit here, that's how it's gonna be. Anyway, that's what you capitalists believe is the greatest part about this world, so stop *****ing about it.

-- August

[RedAnarchist]

They wouldnt tolerate us, so why should we tolerate them?

[Reds]

Originally posted by Rotmutter+Aug 13 2005, 09:53 PM--> (Rotmutter @ Aug 13 2005, 09:53 PM)
[email protected] 13 2005, 02:56 PM

Remember, we are not petty liberals, we are socialist and do not have to listen to the trash of the fascist if we don't want to.

That's nice, so I assume that means in a socialist society there is no freedom of speech?
There would be no free speech for reactionaries. [/b]
not letting nazis have free speech in a socialist society would simply make them stronger.

[Decolonize The Left]

XPhile this is not a valid argument. They don't tolerate us because they are racists, bigots, and chauvenists. We should tolerate them because we are smart enough to listen to what they have to say, and analyze it. We should tolerate everyone to a point, they all have a right to express their beliefs, and we should do are best to show them their misguideness.

We are above fighting their ignorance with more ignorance.

-- August

[madashell]

Originally posted by Freedom [email protected] 13 2005, 09:49 PM

There's a topic on this pinned at the top. This isn't a state, or a country. This is a privately owned domain. And whoever owns it can decide what they don't want to hear and ban whoever says it.

Wait a second, you have property rights, and I don't? Damn hypocrite.
Wait a second, you've come to a revolutionary left discussion board and you haven't even bothered to learn what communists actually mean by property?
Moron.

[Freedom Works]

you haven't even bothered to learn what communists actually mean by property?

Yes, jack and shit. Oh I forgot, it's "everyone's" now!

[Karl Marx's Camel]

Remember, we are not petty liberals, we are socialist and do not have to listen to the trash of the fascist if we don't want to.


Then why keep cappies?

[madashell]

Originally posted by Freedom [email protected] 13 2005, 10:38 PM

you haven't even bothered to learn what communists actually mean by property?

Yes, jack and shit. Oh I forgot, it's "everyone's" now!
Close, but no fine Havanna cigar.

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 13 2005, 12:31 PM
nazi doctrine and the white supremacy that tends to go along with it are eaisly enough debunked and invalidated so why not let them post.
That's one reason why. It's very easily debunked, and has been debunked many, many times. Even the major media puts major airtime behind trashing Naziism.

So anyone who still believes in it is pretty much impervious to reason. In fact, fascist ideology pretty much explicitly downgrades the importance of reason; its major appeal is irrational, to people's worst emotions, subconscious fears and neuroses.

Arguing with them is pretty unproductive. Unless maybe you whack them over the head a few times first so they'll take you seriously; but you can't do that on a message board.

***

Free speech doesn't mean we gotta publish fascist crap in a left newspaper, allow their banners in a progressive demonstration, etc. So why is anyone obligated to host fascist posts on a "revolutionary left" bulletin board?

[Freedom Works]

Because if you don't, you are utilizing private property rights, not collective ones. In other words, you are a hypocrite.

[Severian]

Hardly. I don't go around demanding other people must let me use their personal or political property. You're operating on a stupid caricatured idea of what communism is all about.

[KC]

Wait a second, you have property rights, and I don't? Damn hypocrite.


Of course you have property rights! But this isn't your property. So if whoever owns this domain doesn't like what you're saying, they can ban you. You have property rights; you can go buy a domain too, and ban anyone you want! You just made yourself sound like a complete idiot by trying to be a smartass.



There would be no free speech for reactionaries.

Sure there would be, they just wouldn't be listened to.


They wouldnt tolerate us, so why should we tolerate them?

It's entertaining. I'd make a separate area for nazis, though. I don't want them trashing OI.



not letting nazis have free speech in a socialist society would simply make them stronger.

Exactly.




Yes, jack and shit. Oh I forgot, it's "everyone's" now!

So you don't know? Can you define what communists mean by property please?



Then why keep cappies?

Entertainment. Some of them actually offer up good discussion, though. Some of them are open minded enough for a good debate.


Because if you don't, you are utilizing private property rights, not collective ones. In other words, you are a hypocrite.

Wrong again! Learn the difference between private property and personal property.

[vision]

AugustWest has provided the best rational on this topic.
I'd like to quote him

We should tolerate them because we are smart enough to listen to what they have to say, and analyze it. We should tolerate everyone to a point, they all have a right to express their beliefs, and we should do are best to show them their misguideness.

We are above fighting their ignorance with more ignorance.


what if someone had some crazy nazi beliefs AND some valid and construtive input. They'd be banned and we would have shot ourself in the foot

[redstar2000]

There is no such thing as "absolute free speech"...getting that myth out of your head is a prerequisite to understanding any human society, actual or potential.

Every group of humans has a range of "acceptable discourse" -- things which may be said, discussed, etc. Anything that falls outside that range is prohibited...with a whole range of possible sanctions from mild disapproval up to and including execution.

Many bourgeois liberals still imagine that the "left" will or at least should be "different"...that we will grant "free speech" to those who would kill us without a nanogram of remorse.

No.

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[LSD]

There is no such thing as "absolute free speech"

Depends on how you define "absolute" and "speech". If a reasonable definition of "speech" and a real (that is, something that could exist in reality) definition of "absolute" are given, then there is no reason that absolute free speech could not exist. It, historically, hasn't, but that does not mean the the concept "does not exist" any more than other untried societal models (read: sustained communism) "do not exist".


Every group of humans has a range of "acceptable discourse" -- things which may be said, discussed, etc

And every group of humans is currently being exploited or exploiting others. So what? This isn't about what is, it's about what could be, much like the rest of this board.

In the case of free speech, the fact that societies past and present have failed to respect it is irrelevent. There is a great deal about said societies that should not be emulated.


Anything that falls outside that range is prohibited...with a whole range of possible sanctions from mild disapproval up to and including execution.

True enough, but, as with capitalism itself, the important question here is not is this happening, it's should this be happeneing.


Many bourgeois liberals still imagine that the "left" will or at least should be "different"...that we will grant "free speech" to those who would kill us without a nanogram of remorse.

I don't know about these "bouregois liberals", but I can tell you that if it has any chance of survival, the left must be "different".

If the proletarian alternative isn't, well ...alternative, what's the point?


that we will grant "free speech" to those who would kill us without a nanogram of remorse.

That's emotionalism and you know it.

They would exploit us so let's repress them? It's just class spite, no more, no less.

Sure it feels good, and yeah I understand the sentiment, but, pratically it will cause nothing but harm. In the end, free speech for all is the only sustainable option in a communist society.

P.S., that's society, not message boards. If you don't like the repression of Nazis and other scum on this site feel free to leave. This site makes no pretentions of being anything other than a discussion group, and one with strict requirements for participation.

[Severian]

Originally posted by Lysergic Acid [email protected] 14 2005, 02:15 AM
Depends on how you define "absolute" and "speech". If a reasonable definition of "speech" and a real (that is, something that could exist in reality) definition of "absolute" are given, then there is no reason that absolute free speech could not exist.
Circular. If you define absolute in such a way that it can exist, then there's no reason it can't exist.

If you really want to get into definitions....
dictionary.com (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=absolute)
1Perfect in quality or nature; complete.
2 Not mixed; pure. See Synonyms at pure.
3 a. Not limited by restrictions or exceptions; unconditional: absolute trust.
b. Unqualified in extent or degree; total: absolute silence. See Usage Note at infinite.
4.Unconstrained by constitutional or other provisions: an absolute ruler.
5 Not to be doubted or questioned; positive: absolute proof.
...
8. Law. Complete and unconditional; final.
n.
1. Something that is absolute.
2. Absolute Philosophy.
1. Something regarded as the ultimate basis of all thought and being. Used with the.
2. Something regarded as independent of and unrelated to anything else.

Free speech, like other political concepts, is not absolute, eternal, or unchanging; it was invented by human beings to serve human needs. Which it generally does. But it shouldn't be set up on a pedestal as if it was "independent of and unrelated to anything else."

Based on history, it's clear that fascist groups will have to be ruthlessly smashed in the course of any revolution.

[Bannockburn]

Free speech, like other political concepts, is not absolute, eternal,

That is true. Almost any political doctrine, from liberal democracy to anarchism don't endorse the absolute Right of free speech. That is a problem with rights. Rights aren't completely homogeneous and they do conflict. In this case it would be the right of speech of Nazism, white supremacy and hate speech, and the Right not to be persecuted and the Right to live in safety and away from fear. Generally, in this kind of conflict, free speech is limited.

[LSD]

Circular. If you define absolute in such a way that it can exist, then there's no reason it can't exist.

That's not circular, that's the point. If you define absolute in such a way that it is unattainable then, by definition, absolute free speech is impossible and this discussion is moot. In this context, "Absolute" merely means politically unrestricted since, after all, everything that could be said won't be said and everything that someone could want to say can't be said.

What's dangerous is not journalistic editing, or self-censorship, it's externaliztic political suppression of ideas. Stopping people from speaking / writing / publishing because their ideas are too "reactionary" or "undesirable". That kind of societal repression is inherently dangerous and self-destructive. It must be avoided at all costs.

Is that "absolute"? Perhaps not, but it's as close as we can get.


Free speech, like other political concepts, is not absolute, eternal, or unchanging; it was invented by human beings to serve human needs.

Of course it was. And it does this best when it is as unfettered as possible.


Based on history, it's clear that fascist groups will have to be ruthlessly smashed in the course of any revolution.

Absolutely, but we're talking post-revolution here, once a sustained society is established and formerly organized reaction no longer exists.


In this case it would be the right of speech of Nazism, white supremacy and hate speech, and the Right not to be persecuted and the Right to live in safety and away from fear.

The right to not be persecuted does not extend to controlling what everyone else can say. Persecution has to be felt to be felt. There is a critial difference between a racist following me down the street yelling epithets and him publishing a weblog. In the latter, I can simply not read.

Remember, "offense" is as subjective a thing as any. What I find offensive, you could find humourous; what I consider nonsense, you could consider persecution. There is no objective way to measure what will "provoke" or "offend" or "disturb", we simply do not know enough yet about humanity or psychology or sociology to predict with any accuracy what will cause "fear" and what will not. It's a very dangerous thing to start enforcing such subjective standards on people, forcing them to submit to your judgement on what is "acceptable".

If we prevent reaction from being spoken outloud it won't make it go away, it will just drive it underground, festering among its adherents. The only way to defeat ideas is to confront them in the open and in a full and fair setting. Does that mean having to deal with some muck and some crap? Yeah, but in the end, we're better for it. Remember, if you don't want to read it, don't read it!

[bolshevik butcher]

I think that unless they can acutally been seen as inishgting violence against a group they should be toleraited in a society and allowed free speech. However this is a website, and if malte doesnt want it then fair enough.

[slim]

Thats the thing about forums. They need some kind of guidelines to stop the debates turning into slagging matches and such forth.

If computers could allow you to punch the other person in the screen then there wouldnt be as many guidelines cos a "pecking order" would be set up.

[quincunx5]

Thats the thing about forums. They need some kind of guidelines to stop the debates turning into slagging matches and such forth.


That's the thing about forums - they show what happens when humans engage in free/uncontrolled debate.



If computers could allow you to punch the other person in the screen then there wouldnt be as many guidelines cos a "pecking order" would be set up.


You need to use violence to promote healthy discussion?

If the forums are like this it's because the majority has chosen to make them like this. To all the collectivists here - this is called unofficial voting.

[T_SP]

Hell, lets welcome rascists, paedophiles, murderers, rapists the lot!! Why stop at Nazis?? The vast majority of Nazis can't even stand up straight let alone debate in a civilized manner!!!

[LSD]

That's the thing about forums - they show what happens when humans engage in free/uncontrolled debate.

Except, if you haven't noticed, this forum is neither free nor uncontrolled! I don't even know what you mean by "uncontrolled debate". Every conversation and discussion has its rules, even if they are only implied. A "free and uncontrolled debate" is better knwon as chaos.


If the forums are like this it's because the majority has chosen to make them like this.

And you disagree?

You really think that Nazis can contribute to a revolutionary leftist message board?

Again, this board makes no claims of being anything other than it is. Our interest is in furthering leftist dialogue, not modeling tolerance. The way that Nazis are "treated" on this board has absolutely no relation to how they would be treated in any hypothetical society, "collectivist" or not.

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2005, 11:37 AM
Hell, let's welcome rascists, paedophiles, murderers, rapists the lot!! Why stop at Nazis?? The vast majority of Nazis can't even stand up straight, let alone debate in a civilized manner!!!
Are you not a member of a new forum that does that? And even your forum has already caged someone (for spamming), has it not?

Wherever people gather, they will inevitably establish a range of "acceptable discourse". Everybody has an implied or explicit standard of acceptable and unacceptable speech.

Even those who say they don't.

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[Publius]

Are you not a member of a new forum that does that? And even your forum has already caged someone (for spamming), has it not?

Wherever people gather, they will inevitably establish a range of "acceptable discourse". Everybody has an implied or explicit standard of acceptable and unacceptable speech.

Even those who say they don't.

Somewhat strangely, perhaps, I agree with Redstar.

Limits on speech are INEVIETABLE and DESIRABLE.

If I were to come up to you and explain in graphic detail how I planned to rape your mother, would you stand there and let me say it in the name of 'free speech'?

HELL NO YOU FUCKING IDIOT!

You would slap me where I stood, with good reason.

Free speach isn't desirable if the speach is utter trash.

Get off the ideological high-horse and think it out.

YOu place limits on what YOU say, every second of the day.

[CrazyModerate]

Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2005, 03:32 AM
including execution.


Fuck you redTSAR.

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by CrazyModerate+Aug 14 2005, 09:24 PM--> (CrazyModerate @ Aug 14 2005, 09:24 PM)
[email protected] 14 2005, 03:32 AM
including execution.


Fuck you redTSAR. [/b]
Shooting the messenger will not help...though it may make you feel better.

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[NovelGentry]

Are you not a member of a new forum that does that? And even your forum has already caged someone (for spamming), has it not?

No, our forum is very exact in terms of what is allowed and what isn't. Here is the relevant part of our constitution:


III) All Rebel Alliance netizens are free to take part in discussion without fear and with freedom from exercized prejudice based on sexual preference, nationality, social class, and all inalienable characteristics (*)

* Inalienble Characteristic is to be defined as that which we are incapable of changing. Examples of inalienable characteristics would include race, gender/sex, mental/physical handicaps. Examples of alienable characteristics include religion and political ideology.

There is another clause to which focuses on the quality of posts as they should relate to leftism:


III) Outside of categories Entertainment and Rebel Alliance Administration, and with the exception of Exile, the conversation is expected to be of general leftist themes. While topics do not have to be directly related, they should be relatable to the broader aspects of our theoretical conclusions. Threads and posts in violation of this should be moved. Excessive appeal to opposing ideological aspects including but not limited capitalism, fascism, naziism, and third positionism should be dealt with in the same regard and with respect to the executive actions as described by (Section E, Clause I).

The action undertaken (or possible to be undertaken) is an immediate exile by a moderator (requesting an admin to exile them), and the initiation of a poll to review the action.

[redstar2000]

If I understand you correctly, NG, then your "Exile" forum is the same as our Opposing Ideologies...except that you would permit, in T_SP's words, "racists, paedophiles, murderers, rapists, the lot!!"

If that's correct, then my point still stands. If T_SP wants to debate with Nazis, he need only wait for one to join that forum, be placed in "Exile", and he's "ready to roll".

And that being the case, his advocacy that we do likewise is pointless...since he's already "got what he wants", right?

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[BitchBrew]

I don't appose nazis to post in the "oppsoing ideologi"- section. But the rest of the forum Is for REV. LEFT!