Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 7, 2022 22:17:43 GMT
Maybe you'd need to kill Richard Wagner instead. Or some of the other influences on Hitler. He wasn't spawned in a vacuum. Richard Wagner? Are you fucking kidding me? Why not kill dogs while you're at it? Hitler loved dogs. Don't be an idiot, it doesn't suit you.
|
|
RWB
Legend
Posts: 11,776
|
Post by RWB on Apr 7, 2022 22:31:15 GMT
This is a thread about "free speech" or more accurately.. can or when does free speech go too far. Here we can, at any time in his rise, pull the trigger and a time traveling bullet drops Hitler like RWB dropping an unread science primer.. (Hint: they're all unread.)
Some might say.. kill him in his crib.. or kill his mother. Obviously wrong. He hasn't "Hitler'ed" yet .. Once he begins to "Hitler" is he fair game?
Or .. for you namby pambies... if you prefer, rather than a time traveling bullet killing Hitler .. a temporally agile Mark Zuckerburg bans him from ze ZZocial media of that time ..
The point is for all those who like to say "Under complete freedom of speech, more persuasive ideas are able to gain more votes and thus more power and control of armies and police than less persuasive ideas." .. how should we or in fact should we stop persuasive ideas that are clearly psychopathic.?
you mean like you stating over and over that it wasn't Democrats who started the KKK?
|
|
bama beau
Legend
Fish will piss anywhere. They just live in water.
Posts: 10,267
Member is Online
|
Post by bama beau on Apr 8, 2022 7:34:47 GMT
Maybe you'd need to kill Richard Wagner instead. Or some of the other influences on Hitler. He wasn't spawned in a vacuum. But isn't that only kicking the can down the road? Or are you suggesting that kicking the can is what is called for? That killing should be the last resort? Seems reasonable to me. Arguendo then, what does Putin merit, for you: Kicking or killing?
|
|
Odysseus
Legend
Trump=Chump
Posts: 39,090
|
Post by Odysseus on Apr 8, 2022 7:59:26 GMT
Newsflash: Adolf Hitler died about 77 years ago.
|
|
Fiddler
Legend
Wasted again ..
Posts: 13,787
|
Post by Fiddler on Apr 8, 2022 13:24:26 GMT
As I recall, nobody had to kill Hitler. He committed suicide. LOL.. way to miss the point. .. Newsflash: Adolf Hitler died about 77 years ago. Yes.. Apparently just a few years before the death of your inquisitiveness ... You do understand that this is a thought experiment.. don't you.?
|
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 8,013
|
Post by demos on Apr 8, 2022 13:32:14 GMT
Richard Wagner? Are you fucking kidding me? Why not kill dogs while you're at it? Hitler loved dogs. Don't be an idiot, it doesn't suit you. Wagner's operas and his racism were an influence on Hitler and other anti-semites who became Nazis. Hitler's dog wasn't. The issue of the OP is dangerous ideas and expression of those ideas, not pets.
|
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 8,013
|
Post by demos on Apr 8, 2022 13:53:15 GMT
But isn't that only kicking the can down the road? Or are you suggesting that kicking the can is what is called for? That killing should be the last resort? No, my point is that Hitler's ideology was a product of a number of things: European/German anti-semitism, weird Germanic occult beliefs, etc. If you really want to stop Hitler, you want to stop these ideas before they percolate for so long that they're just part of his cultural milieu. In the case of anti-semitism, you're gonna have to kill some dudes way back in the Middle Ages. As long as we're conducting a time travelling thought experiment, you'd want to nip this in the bud before we even get to Hitler.
|
|
Fiddler
Legend
Wasted again ..
Posts: 13,787
|
Post by Fiddler on Apr 8, 2022 13:56:47 GMT
This is a thread about "free speech" or more accurately.. can or when does free speech go too far. Here we can, at any time in his rise, pull the trigger and a time traveling bullet drops Hitler like RWB dropping an unread science primer.. (Hint: they're all unread.)
Some might say.. kill him in his crib.. or kill his mother. Obviously wrong. He hasn't "Hitler'ed" yet .. Once he begins to "Hitler" is he fair game?
Or .. for you namby pambies... if you prefer, rather than a time traveling bullet killing Hitler .. a temporally agile Mark Zuckerburg bans him from ze ZZocial media of that time ..
The point is for all those who like to say "Under complete freedom of speech, more persuasive ideas are able to gain more votes and thus more power and control of armies and police than less persuasive ideas." .. how should we or in fact should we stop persuasive ideas that are clearly psychopathic.?
you mean like you stating over and over that it wasn't Democrats who started the KKK?
I know this will have you sobbing into your Klan vestments, but I've never once said that..
What I have said .. and am 100% correct in saying.. is that Civil War era Southern Democrats were Conservatives..
Conservatives started the Klan..
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 8, 2022 14:21:21 GMT
This is a thread about "free speech" or more accurately.. can or when does free speech go too far. Here we can, at any time in his rise, pull the trigger and a time traveling bullet drops Hitler like RWB dropping an unread science primer.. (Hint: they're all unread.)
Some might say.. kill him in his crib.. or kill his mother. Obviously wrong. He hasn't "Hitler'ed" yet .. Once he begins to "Hitler" is he fair game?
Or .. for you namby pambies... if you prefer, rather than a time traveling bullet killing Hitler .. a temporally agile Mark Zuckerburg bans him from ze ZZocial media of that time ..
The point is for all those who like to say "Under complete freedom of speech, more persuasive ideas are able to gain more votes and thus more power and control of armies and police than less persuasive ideas." .. how should we or in fact should we stop persuasive ideas that are clearly psychopathic.?
Your post doesn't make a lick of sense. You keep trying to point to the Murdochs or Reagan or Nixon or <insertleftistbogeymanhere> to justify being Hitler without understanding any of those things beyond the bumper sticker rationalizations of political campaigns.
Please look into "free speech" in Germany circa 1920s-1930s and the Weimar Republic's attempts to "defend democracy from anti democratic ideas" by putting restrictions on the use of radio. Take a look into figures like Hans Bredow. The first chairman of Weimar Germany's national broadcasting service. Weimar bureaucrats attempted for ten years to "kill Hitler" in the way you (seem to?) be advocating by trying to control and "depoliticize" radio before Hitler's rise to power. And all they wound up doing was giving Hitler the most effective tool for Nazi power possible.
It's the genesis for my anti censorship argument I was making on the boards trying to turn this cultural shift on the left by saying things like "What happens when Herr Drumpf is in charge of what is acceptable speech?"
Pearls before swine.
|
|
Fiddler
Legend
Wasted again ..
Posts: 13,787
|
Post by Fiddler on Apr 8, 2022 14:36:15 GMT
But isn't that only kicking the can down the road? Or are you suggesting that kicking the can is what is called for? That killing should be the last resort? As long as we're conducting a time travelling thought experiment, you'd want to nip this in the bud before we even get to Hitler.
Yes but ...
I agree that these thoughts do not exist in a vacuum .. Trump's racist, misogynistic rhetoric didn't originate with Trump.. Richard Spencer is carrying on the traditions of Southern White Supremacists.
Hitler was chosen because we know the outcome.. we know that 'speech' was indeed weaponized. Isn't there a point at which preventing him from persuading weaker minds to join him in his psychotic aspirations is warranted?
|
|
Fiddler
Legend
Wasted again ..
Posts: 13,787
|
Post by Fiddler on Apr 8, 2022 14:42:11 GMT
This is a thread about "free speech" or more accurately.. can or when does free speech go too far. Here we can, at any time in his rise, pull the trigger and a time traveling bullet drops Hitler like RWB dropping an unread science primer.. (Hint: they're all unread.)
Some might say.. kill him in his crib.. or kill his mother. Obviously wrong. He hasn't "Hitler'ed" yet .. Once he begins to "Hitler" is he fair game?
Or .. for you namby pambies... if you prefer, rather than a time traveling bullet killing Hitler .. a temporally agile Mark Zuckerburg bans him from ze ZZocial media of that time ..
The point is for all those who like to say "Under complete freedom of speech, more persuasive ideas are able to gain more votes and thus more power and control of armies and police than less persuasive ideas." .. how should we or in fact should we stop persuasive ideas that are clearly psychopathic.?
Your post doesn't make a lick of sense. You keep trying to point to the Murdochs or Reagan or Nixon or <insertleftistbogeymanhere> to justify being Hitler without understanding any of those things beyond the bumper sticker rationalizations of political campaigns.
Please look into "free speech" in Germany circa 1920s-1930s and the Weimar Republic's attempts to "defend democracy from anti democratic ideas" by putting restrictions on the use of radio. Take a look into figures like Hans Bredow. The first chairman of Weimar Germany's national broadcasting service. Weimar bureaucrats attempted for ten years to "kill Hitler" in the way you (seem to?) be advocating by trying to control and "depoliticize" radio before Hitler's rise to power. And all they wound up doing was giving Hitler the most effective tool for Nazi power possible.
It's the genesis for my anti censorship argument I was making on the boards trying to turn this cultural shift on the left by saying things like "What happens when Herr Drumpf is in charge of what is acceptable speech?"
Pearls before swine.
I didn't realize that I needed to explain what a thought experiment was ..
|
|
rmwa
Legend
Timeout2
Posts: 2,449
|
Post by rmwa on Apr 8, 2022 15:07:52 GMT
This thread is obviously calling for the genocide of conservatives, Republicans, and all the non-woke, so at what point do we kill Fiddler? Do we wait until it's too late and wish we had acted sooner?
Also, I notice that Fiddler sounds an awful lot like Hitler.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 8, 2022 15:08:22 GMT
Your post doesn't make a lick of sense. You keep trying to point to the Murdochs or Reagan or Nixon or <insertleftistbogeymanhere> to justify being Hitler without understanding any of those things beyond the bumper sticker rationalizations of political campaigns.
Please look into "free speech" in Germany circa 1920s-1930s and the Weimar Republic's attempts to "defend democracy from anti democratic ideas" by putting restrictions on the use of radio. Take a look into figures like Hans Bredow. The first chairman of Weimar Germany's national broadcasting service. Weimar bureaucrats attempted for ten years to "kill Hitler" in the way you (seem to?) be advocating by trying to control and "depoliticize" radio before Hitler's rise to power. And all they wound up doing was giving Hitler the most effective tool for Nazi power possible.
It's the genesis for my anti censorship argument I was making on the boards trying to turn this cultural shift on the left by saying things like "What happens when Herr Drumpf is in charge of what is acceptable speech?"
Pearls before swine.
I didn't realize that I needed to explain what a thought experiment was ..
That's the point Fiddler. Your so called "thought experiment" ... doesn't make a lick of sense. You give the "thinker" (lol) options. Shoot Hitler with a time traveling bullet, or Mark Zuckerberg banning him from zzocial media.
Hans Bredow WAS Mark Zuckerberg. And his actions inadvertently helped Hitler rise to power and the broadcasting infrastructure he built guaranteed the Nazi regime's stranglehold on power.
So your "thought experiment" is
Kill Hitler,
Or..
"...for you namby pambies... if you prefer, rather than a time traveling bullet killing Hitler" ... guarantee Hitler through restrictions on free speech.
What fucking sense does that make?
|
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 8,013
|
Post by demos on Apr 8, 2022 15:08:25 GMT
Hitler was chosen because we know the outcome.. we know that 'speech' was indeed weaponized. Isn't there a point at which preventing him from persuading weaker minds to join him in his psychotic aspirations is warranted? As mentioned earlier, I think that point is when thought starts to become action. In Hitler's case, there was the putsch. However, because the culture - at least in Bavaria - was sympathetic to Hitler's views (if not in outright agreement), he was given a very light sentence and allowed to write Mein Kampf while he was in a jail for a few months.
|
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 8,013
|
Post by demos on Apr 8, 2022 15:49:21 GMT
Alternatively, someone could've just let Hitler into that damned art school.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 8, 2022 16:05:34 GMT
But isn't that only kicking the can down the road? Or are you suggesting that kicking the can is what is called for? That killing should be the last resort? No, my point is that Hitler's ideology was a product of a number of things: European/German anti-semitism, weird Germanic occult beliefs, etc. If you really want to stop Hitler, you want to stop these ideas before the percolate for so long that they're just part of his cultural milieu. In the case of anti-semitism, you're gonna have to kill some dudes way back in the Middle Ages. As long as we're conducting a time travelling thought experiment, you'd want to nip this in the bud before we even get to Hitler. Geniuses like Wagner happen about five times in a century, if you're going to dismiss them because they were essentially people of their time otherwise, you're a fucking imbecile. That's what I have to say. And you had better pay attention, you philistine.
|
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 8,013
|
Post by demos on Apr 8, 2022 16:08:24 GMT
Geniuses like Wagner happen about five times in a century, if you're going to dismiss them because they were essentially people of their time otherwise, you're a fucking imbecile. That's what I have to say. And you had better pay attention, you philistine. You like opera. Awesome. I don't really care. The issue is about ideas, and yes, Wagner was a product of his time. That's kinda the point: " No, my point is that Hitler's ideology was a product of a number of things: European/German anti-semitism, weird Germanic occult beliefs, etc. If you really want to stop Hitler, you want to stop these ideas before they percolate for so long that they're just part of his cultural milieu. In the case of anti-semitism, you're gonna have to kill some dudes way back in the Middle Ages." Maybe you should read all the comments in the thread.
|
|
|
Post by MojoJojo on Apr 8, 2022 16:38:09 GMT
Interesting thread. If we're really addressing free speech, then a good example of extremist speech would be the Radio talking heads from Rwanda. www.theguardian.com/media/2003/dec/04/pressandpublishing.radioThey promoted the killing (but didn't participate) on air and helped the masses get worked up enough to keep the blood flowing. Free speech? Criminal speech? Found guilty AFTERWARDS, but can, or should, they have been banned earlier?
|
|
|
Post by oldtrapper on Apr 8, 2022 16:44:31 GMT
This is a thread about "free speech" or more accurately.. can or when does free speech go too far. Here we can, at any time in his rise, pull the trigger and a time traveling bullet drops Hitler like RWB dropping an unread science primer.. (Hint: they're all unread.)
Some might say.. kill him in his crib.. or kill his mother. Obviously wrong. He hasn't "Hitler'ed" yet .. Once he begins to "Hitler" is he fair game?
Or .. for you namby pambies... if you prefer, rather than a time traveling bullet killing Hitler .. a temporally agile Mark Zuckerburg bans him from ze ZZocial media of that time ..
The point is for all those who like to say "Under complete freedom of speech, more persuasive ideas are able to gain more votes and thus more power and control of armies and police than less persuasive ideas." .. how should we or in fact should we stop persuasive ideas that are clearly psychopathic.? We never killed Hitler, nor did we do anything to stop him save for what we are doing for Ukraine now, military equipment, training, and volunteers to fight. And just like Hitler, Putin is taking advantage of it, and committing the same war crimes. And still we do nothing.
It was not until Japan bombed Pearl Harbor that we entered the war. So, what will it take this time for the cowards to actually do something.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 8, 2022 16:46:13 GMT
If you "nip things in the bud", you're not only destroying freedom of speech, you're also condoning the same kind of behavior as the one you're trying to denounce. So no, before you stop someone or something you need to wait until it has done something eminently bad.
|
|