Last remaining Far-Right groups banned from Social Media.

I'm afraid that I must disagree that only one country and it's people are responsible for WW 2 and its multi-national atrocities.
I doubt that WW 2 would have occurred without the draconian Treaty of Versailles, Danzig massacres, Bloody Sunday and numerous other factors.
History is not so simple.
Since this thread is about censorship of Right Wing groups I'm afraid that we're off-topic.
If you would like to continue to discuss WW 2, the holocaust etc, we can do so at the following thread:

"About the Holocaust"
http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/about-the-holocaust.552312/

 

This is the ultimate result of the moronic and dishonest hate speech construct. The goal is to eliminate free speech and it is succeeding around the world especially on college campuses in the US.

 

Are you referring to your post or Xnamnes's post?

Perhaps you can answer the question that Xnamnes ran away from which is which groups advocate for the murder of Donald Trump, or which Islamic extremism groups are allowed to remain on the same platforms?

 

I responded to the OP.

 

I don't support the Muslim pedophiles. You support the close friend of the pedophile Peter Gillett. You don't give a toss about any of the victims.

 

Anyone (group or individual) that feels a need to resort to hate speech is undeserving of a platform to spew from, in my opinion. They are best ignored but eliminating them from public is fine with me and playing the first amendment card is weak defense.

 

No you didn't!

 

I very little care if you agree or not.
But what you are trying to do, stinks like the brown stuff.

 

In fact you have no idea who I support or don't support. If I do support someone I'll say so, okay? Can you understand that?

 

Do you feel qualified to determine what is 'Hate Speech' and what isn't? If not do you have anyone else in mind who may be able to make these judgements? Perhaps a University Professor? A Social Commentator? A new Department set up by Donald Trump and his legal team to prohibit speech that reflects badly on his Administration? This might be a good chance to share your thoughts on the subject.

 

So would you go the Fascist, Nazi, Communist route and ban free speech? Or would you go with the US First Amendment that has guaranteed Free Speech for over 240 years?

 

That's the thing of it. They determine what is and isn't hate speech. Which sometimes includes that which they simply don't wish to hear. It's fine if people want to go down the rabbit hole with blackened hearts and their fingers in their ears. But they don't have the right to drag whole populations, nations and worlds with them, especially the youth because they are the future.

 

Hate speech to me would be commentary meant to insight violence or anger in a population, demographic or situation that is directed with clear intent. But the legal definition works as well.
"

Hate speech is a statement intended to demean and brutalize another. It is the use of cruel and derogatory language, gestures or vandalism often directed towards an individual or group.[1] Hate speech is speech that attacks a person or a group on the basis of attributes such as race, religion, ethnic origin, national origin, sex, disability, sexual orientation, or gender identity.[2][3] The laws of some countries describe hate speech as speech, gestures, conduct, writing, or displays that incite violence or prejudicial actions against a group or individuals on the basis of their membership in the group, or disparages or intimidates a group, or individuals on the basis of their membership in the group. The law may identify a group based on certain characteristics.[4][5][6] In some countries, hate speech is not a legal term.[7] Additionally in some countries, including the United States, hate speech is constitutionally protected"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech

 

Everyone should be grateful for the bolded.

 

When one enlists in the US Military, you take an oath the protect & defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign & domestic.

Countless people have made the ultimate sacrifice so that we have the freedom to express ideas, popular and unpopular. Therefore, it would be a betrayal of those brave men & women to surrender the right of free speech to the whims of faceless bureaucrats, weak willed individuals and totalitarian "Thought Police".

 

There is no thing as hate speech.

 

That’s exactly my point as well. There is no thing as hate speech. It’s an artificial construct of the left to eliminate free speech.

 

Go back and review my post and the post I responded to.

 

Brilliant, now you all you have to do is define hate speech in a way that everybody agrees with and we are done.

Given my understanding of hate speech, anybody pushing the white privilege narrative is engaging in hate speech. Unlike you I have no problem allowing these bigots to engage in their hatred of whites but you apparently would prefer to "eliminate them from public".

Whats that, white privilege doesn't meet your definition of hate speech? Well we have a problem now don't we? Who gets to define what hate speech is? I am sure you are down with the concept because you believe your side has power to define it. What happens if the winds shift and conservatives get to define it? You need to think from your own self interest. It is against your self interest to allow powerful entities to take away your speech rights because they take offense to it.

 

You did not quote the OP!

 

Okay. It was the second post in the thread. Big deal.

 

Exactly. Once “Hate Speech” is a criminal act those in control can gradually eliminate free speech and control speech as is clearly demonstrated at our universities today.

 

So you agree with the post you quoted?

 

No whoever Facebook have appointed to decide, after all they are a company and have the right to stop people using their platform if they wish. Are you going to start dictating to companies who they can and cannot trade with?

 

Huh?