So, how do you abolish “hate” groups who who gets to decide who they are?
Trashing 2 Amendments in one LTE
Published
Tidewater News and Opinion Forum
A place for civil discussion of the events of the day for Tidewater residents without the limitations imposed by media forums.
Tidewater News and Opinion Forum 
That’s the best ya got, “who gets to decide” who “hate” groups are?
We diagnose mental illness to the point where we will lock people up to protect society.
The KKK is a defined “hate” group, do you propose that we should just leave them alone because who’s really qualified to defined them as such?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Defined by who? Not that I disagree, but do we hold current KKK members accountable for acts of violence by former members? Are they allowed to meet and to speak? Does the 1st Amendment not protect their speech, however odious it might be?
Are the Proud Boys a hate group? What about Occupy Wall Street? Who gets to decide?
Any attempt to abolish them will be worse for the country than they are.
LikeLike
Antifa may be the most problematic hate group for the Left. For years I challenged users at the Pilot blog to denounce it. No takers.
My takeaway is that the concept of “hate group” itself is a political tactic which the Left reserves for its own use. The evil of it is the evil of witch hunts, scapegoats and stoning.
LikeLike
I have repeatedly denounced some of the violent tactics used by ANTIFA. I also condemn the violence of right wing groups, such as Unite the Right, the KKK, and other hate based organizations.
The right of assembly BY CITIZENS to denounce hateful rhetoric by CITIZENS and not the government is legal. The problem is when these group confront each other, it turns violent. And rarely is it clear who throws the first “punch”. We can debate back and forth over who was responsible for the violence in Charlottesville. ( I say the lack of proper actions by law enforcement to provide separate spaces for the conflicting groups was the biggest issue). But the 1A is much more important today than in our history as people attack the press for their reports or opinions. Both right and left.
Disagree, but do it civilly, as we are doing here.
LikeLike
RE: “I have repeatedly denounced some of the violent tactics used by ANTIFA.”
Yes, that’s the usual dodge. Denounce the violence that Antifa willfully employs, but not Antifa for employing it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s not a dodge, it’s the way it is. I cringe when violence in defense of opinions that I agree with is utilized to forward ideas.. I cringe as much when those I disagree with participate in violent demonstrations.
Yet I don’t see you denouncing violence by those on the right. So it’s bad when a leftist group practices violence, but it’s OK when those on the right do it? hmmmm. Denouncing the violence by ANY group is what should be important. But you seem to focus solely on ANTIFA as if they are the only violent group out there.
The violence is wrong, regardless of who practices it. What they are standing for or against should be the issue.
LikeLike
Why are you always so concerned with Antifa? They haven’t killed a single person. They’ve blackened an eye or two and knocked over some mailboxes while LARPing as revolutionaries. Antifa participants are multi-ethnic, religiously diverse, and cover many racial and gender identities. It would be difficult for such an assembly to constitute a “hate group.”
As far as I can tell, the only people they hate are bigots and, obviously, fascists.
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “Yet I don’t see you denouncing violence by those on the right.”
I don’t have to, as a rule. I denounce white supremacists, neo nazis, the KKK and other groups on the right in themselves. Their use of violence is but one reason to do so.
Were it the only reason, I would denounce those groups in themselves for their use of violence alone.
I see no one on the left taking a similar view of Antifa.
LikeLike
RE: “Why are you always so concerned with Antifa?”
I saw Antifa’s dangerous potential a long time ago, and commented about it in public. I was astonished by the weakness of the arguments Antifa defenders raised in response to my statements. Also by the vehemence of their responses to me.
Since then, Antifa tactics have evolved from demonstration to civil disobedience, then to uncivil disobedience, then to property damage, then to physical assault, just as I originally predicted. Even in the face of this documented history, there are those who rationalize Antifa illogically, just as you do: Antifa hasn’t killed anyone, so they must be good, not evil.
I say Antifa is evil. And I will continue to say it until others are able to acknowledge it.
LikeLike
I have to agree with you on this one. Freedom of speech and freedom of assembly allow such people to indulge their hatreds and fantasies. Enforcement of laws against violence and conspiracy to commit violence is the way to contain such people. With that said, it is entirely appropriate for law enforcement to monitor and surveil such people more closely than less obnoxious citizens. Their threats and rhetoric do lead to violence.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I agree, it was not my intent to suggest that free speech be curtailed, but rather to focus on groups that are a clear danger to society based on their actions and rhetoric.
LikeLiked by 1 person