Reason Writers Around Town
Over at Jewcy.com, Michael Moynihan debates Ali Eteraz on Geert Wilders' right to free speech.
Comments to "Reason Writers Around Town":
Johnathan Reale | April 18, 2008, 3:36pm | #
W/o having read the article, I'm still going to guess the subtitle should read "protect", not "protest".shrike | April 18, 2008, 3:49pm | #
Islam IS incompatible with democracy - not only Spencer but Amir Teheri strongly support this notion.The Bushnecks pine over a secular democracy in Iraq while they steadfastly oppose such in the USA - that should tell you all you need to know.
Yeah, I agree. Hell, in America, they don't send you to jail for Holocaust denial. And let's face it, aside from being hypocrisy against liberal principles, censoring ANYBODY just helps their cause. But let's face it: Geert Wilders is a xenophobe who is an enemy to liberal society; just like the "Know-Nothings" who veiled their bigotry against Irish-Catholics in the cloak of protecting American democracy from becoming a papal dictatorship.
economist | April 18, 2008, 4:10pm | #
When Geert Wilders starts suicide-bombing people who disagree with him, we might have a problem.economist | April 18, 2008, 4:11pm | #
Until then, stay cool.concerned observer | April 18, 2008, 4:20pm | #
i think its terrible that a supposedly enlightened european democracy would choose to let this guys hate speech go unopposed. what people here (and apparently in holland) need to learn is that freedom of speech isn't absolute. if you say things that cause hate against any group of people for no reason, you should be prosecuted.concerned observer: Wow, I couldn't disagree more (assuming you are serious, of course). Hate speech is absolutely protected by the Constitution, and it's supposed to be. You can't just protect the stuff that is polite and uncontroversial.
The Winter Soldier | April 18, 2008, 4:35pm | #
economist: We'll only have a problem if Geert has figured out cloning. Otherwise, we only to need to worry about the first bomb.Ali | April 18, 2008, 4:35pm | #
Wilders has every damn right to say what he wants. It is incumbent on Muslims to disprove him wrong. Watching the film myself, and as Michael and Ali indicate, it should not be hard for Muslims to do so.ce | April 18, 2008, 4:38pm | #
Who says his hate speech is unopposed? Anyone and everyone is free to criticize it with their own speech.Pro Libertate | April 18, 2008, 4:42pm | #
Say what you will, but I loved Geert Wilders in Young Frankenstein.TallDave | April 18, 2008, 4:47pm | #
if you say things that cause hate against any group of people for no reason, you should be prosecuted.You just said that something that causes hate against people who use hateful speech, therefore by your own logic you should be arrested.
TallDave | April 18, 2008, 4:49pm | #
oops s/b"You just said something that causes hate against people who use hateful speech, therefore by your own logic you should be arrested."
The Democratic Republican | April 18, 2008, 4:54pm | #
" a supposedly enlightened european democracy would choose to let this guys hate speech go unopposed"What? I have to reiterate what (H&R) ce and Ali said: you're not upset because the movie is "unopposed"; you're upset because the Dutch government isn't opposing it with censorship, coercion and prosecution.
The Democratic Republican | April 18, 2008, 4:55pm | #
I wish Michael had hammered Ali over the same non-sequitir. In a single sentence, Ali conflated speech/film with an example of how liberal societies don't tolerate "discrimination." Oddly enough, discrimination is an ACTION. Liberal societies do, in fact (to varying degrees), tolerate prejudice, which is speech/thought.Aresen | April 18, 2008, 5:07pm | #
Well, he'll only do it once...
economist | April 18, 2008, 4:10pm | #
When Geert Wilders starts suicide-bombing people who disagree with him, we might have a problem.
Pro Libertate | April 18, 2008, 5:20pm | #
Is attempted suicide bombing a crime? Is it the attempted suicide or the attempted bombing that is at issue?concerned observer | April 18, 2008, 5:20pm | #
thats the problem with libertarians and conservatives. just because the "the constitution" protects hate speech doesn't make it right. the constitution of the united states was written 200 years ago. besides, doesn't it have a general welfare clause to allow for action in gray areas like these?Sideshow Bob: Attempted murder? Now honestly, what is that? Do they give a Nobel Prize for attempted chemistry?
Can you please, for those of us who are joining whatever this is midstream, include more backstory?
economist | April 18, 2008, 5:29pm | #
My bad. I should have said that when he starts ordering people to suicide-bomb his opponents, we have a problem. If he himself suicide bombs, the problem resolves itself.concerned observr | April 18, 2008, 5:32pm | #
that's the problem you say if anyone disagrees with you they must be joking. and you're always talking about free speech. the hypocrisy is amazing.Pro Libertate | April 18, 2008, 5:35pm | #
Certainly, Mike. Geert Wilders (born Jerome Silberman, June 11, 1933) is an American Emmy Award-winning and twice Academy Award-nominated stage and screen actor, director and screenwriter. He starred in such films as The Producers, Young Frankenstein, Blazing Saddles, and Silver Streak. He also made a movie that was highly critical of Muslims.Pro Libertate | April 18, 2008, 5:36pm | #
Oh, and he was also Willie Wonka, who, now that I think about it, was clearly anti-Islam.Travis | April 18, 2008, 6:13pm | #
"just because the "the constitution" protects hate speech doesn't make it right. the constitution of the united states was written 200 years ago. besides, doesn't it have a general welfare clause to allow for action in gray areas like these?"So hatefull speech wasn't a problem 200 years ago but now it is?
J sub D | April 18, 2008, 6:16pm | #
Oh, and he was also Willie Wonka, who, now that I think about it, was clearly anti-Islam.That Oompa Loompa parody of Islam was particularly offensive.
concerned observer | April 18, 2008, 6:32pm | #
about libertarians and conservatives: conservatives are the ones i think actually hate minorities, but libertarians are their enablers by protecting their hate speech.ce | April 18, 2008, 6:34pm | #
But it evens out because we're also enabling all the people that whine about racism.Nasikabatrachus | April 18, 2008, 6:48pm | #
thats the problem with libertarians and conservatives. just because the "the constitution" protects hate speech doesn't make it right.Hear, hear. Why do I have a right to something just because a piece of paper says I do? If the constitution said it's okay to rape oompa loompas, does that make it right?
That's why I say you have the right to say whatever the hell you want with your own property, whether the message is "hateful" or not.
about libertarians and conservatives: conservatives are the ones i think actually hate minorities, but libertarians are their enablers by protecting their hate speech.
Since when did the libertarian movement gain enough power to be an "enabler" to conservatives? The conservatives are the enablers to the conservatives. There isn't even that much hate speech anyway.
And since when are all or even most conservatives racist? I think you're relying on an unquestioned stereotype, and are consequentially a bigot.
Jordan | April 18, 2008, 7:17pm | #
about libertarians and conservatives: conservatives are the ones i think actually hate minorities, but libertarians are their enablers by protecting their hate speech.That sounds like "hate speech" to me. Arrest yourself, moron.
shrike | April 18, 2008, 8:17pm | #
I think "hate speech" is a duty.And I have been accused of being a "leftist" here.
Actually, I am an anarchist, but coming from the Bush sycophants here I consider "leftist" a compliment....
Lajaw | April 19, 2008, 9:31am | #
"conservatives are the ones i think actually hate minorities"Yes, you are correct. They want to continue the welfare state that enables and motivates so many minorities to pull themselves up by the bootstraps and make something of themselves. Sheesh!
shminky | April 19, 2008, 9:52am | #
Concerned Observer is employing hate speech against conservatives. Arrest him!wingtip | April 19, 2008, 2:46pm | #
today;4/19/1775 – The American Revolutionary War began with the Battles of Lexington and Concord in Middlesex County ,Massachusetts .
juris imprudent | April 19, 2008, 3:16pm | #
Damn, concerned observer started so promisingly, then by the 3rd post had slipped into very pedestrian trollery.LiberatarianFundie | April 19, 2008, 10:30pm | #
If hate speech is banned, the terrorists win!Ok, bad joke. But joking aside, I am wary of any move to curtail speech (yes, that includes hate speech or even idiotic speech). Not just because it provides material for stand-up comics, but more importantly, there is a risk of going too far. I mean, who is to say what qualifies as hate speech except on the level of offense it generates (Of course, by hate speech, we would mean the kind of speech that is derogatory to a certain demographic of the population). The problem is where do we stop then. Should we also ban speech that is critical to a religion when it is based on facts (i.e. a religion that performs human sacrifice. Not that to the best of my knowledge, one does exist in the western civilization)? There are unintended consequences in censorship as there are in free speech. Free speech might allow offensive speech to exist, but censorship might silence dissent. In censorship, the only speech that is allowed is the one of the persons that have the legal system on their side.
B | April 19, 2008, 10:40pm | #
Your academic disinterest in Islam is obvious. The Koran is considered the ultimate, infallible word of Islam. Perhaps you should read it before you express your lack of patience for arguments about dhimmitude. The Koran clearly states how non-Muslims are to be treated, and it is not the same as Muslims. Perhaps you should educate yourself about the nature of Islam before you sound again sound like a total fucking idiot. And since when does pointing out the violent nature of both modern Islam and the Koran make one a hate filled imbecile? It seems the authors of this magazine are as gutless as anyone else when it comes to confronting the backward philosophy that is Islam. What a fucking joke.B | April 19, 2008, 10:42pm | #
"The Bushnecks pine over a secular democracy in Iraq while they steadfastly oppose such in the USA - that should tell you all you need to know."More grade Z commentary from assholes on this site. What a way to not only call Bush supporters idiots but also take a shot at the President in a discussion that has absolutely nothing to do with either. And I don't remember Bush ever clamoring for a theocracy. You have spent too much time reading Andrew Sullivan, you witless jackass.
JohnD | April 21, 2008, 8:33am | #
"Concerned Observer" is a bigger fool then most of the morons on this forum.And as far as "hate speech" is concerned, most of it comes from the left.