I just finished watching a documentary on Neo Nazi groups. The levels of ignorance and hypocrisy that these groups carry with them just makes me so angry, not to mention the disrespect of calling themselves Nazis in a country whose troops died fighting the Nazis. What are your oppinions on it and do you have any relevant stories to do with this topic?
It's not the idea of them coming back into power. It's the idea that they already act violently and spread fear throughout the populace. They don't need official power to really have it.
Also, with you being a facist wouldn't you want to throw these dudes to the wolves, they're smearing your political groups name.
Also, with you being a facist wouldn't you want to throw these dudes to the wolves, they're smearing your political groups name.
Yes but they are the only sliver of the populace that believes partially in such doctrines. If it were possible to tame them....make them shed the lining of racism and hate....
Meh, I found out today that in Australia we don't have freedom of speech. We have laws that say things like we cannot actively go out and say things to people with the intention of intimidating or offending them. That's how it should be.
Why would that not be good in other countries then?
Just take Western, Asian and Middle Eastern countries in general. Each has a different value system, infused with their own unique culture. Westerners place a huge priority on liberty, freedom, democracy...But Asians on the other hand have a much more differing system. Confucianism, filial piety, loyalty to leaders.
But what I'm saying is that the system that is used in Amercia is being abused. And I think that that might fix it. The way I see it is if the problem is already there especially in this case, you can't make it much worse by trying to tinker with the law to fix it.
Sorry for the double post but I foudn this on the wikipedia page on Hate Groups. I think it gets my point across better than I can.
Dr. Ehud Sprinzak, an expert on terrorism and hate crimes, asserts that verbal violence is "the use of extreme language against an individual or a group that either implies a direct threat that physical force will be used against them, or is seen as an indirect call for others to use it." Sprinzak argues that verbal violence is often a substitute for real violence, and that the verbalization of hate has the potential to incite people who are incapable of distinguishing between real and verbal violence to engage in actual violence.1 Historian Daniel Goldhagen, discussing anti-semitic hate groups, argues that we should view "verbal violence... as an assault in its own right, having been intended to produce profound damageâ"emotional, psychological, and socialâ"to the dignity and honor of the Jews. The wounds that people suffer by... such vituperation... can be as bad as... [a] beating."2
