I Won't Take A Syllable Of That Back And I'll Say It Again
The "free speech" absolutist meaning of "Never Again" means, "Well, we're willing to take a chance on it happening again". Which is stunningly irresponsible after the history of the genocidal 20th century, a symptom of moral indifference.
"I Won't Take A Syllable Of That Back And I'll Say It Again "
ReplyDeleteCourageous words, Sparkles, and unminced!
"The "free speech" absolutist meaning of "Never Again" means, "Well, we're willing to take a chance on it happening again". "
ReplyDeleteEvery Jew who ever lived: "NEVER AGAIN! NEVER AGAIN!.....WELL, MAYBE ONE MORE TIME!"
Just to say: you aren't the only one complaining about the ACLU and free speech:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.vox.com/2017/8/20/16167870/aclu-hate-speech-nazis-charlottesville
I read it quickly, that Ken White guy is a lunatic,
ReplyDeleteBut White is adamant that “carrying weapons isn’t in itself incitement,” and that someone can’t argue they face “reasonable fear” from a demonstrator simply carrying a weapon in a place where it’s legal to do so. “Combine open carry with a statement like ‘we are coming for you,’ and you've got something,” he says. “But you still need a threat.”
So, right up till they open fire it's AOK, unless they say they're going to fire.
I'm not impressed with the ACLU's new position that they'll represent Nazis if they promise to leave their guns home. A. they trust Nazis and whoever they invite to come to do what they said they would? B. So, I guess knives, shives, explosive devices, cars, let's not forget cars, brought to a Nazi rally are not disqualifying?
I really did make the break with the ACLU over Skokie, right after Buckley v. Valeo. I haven't read every detail of the history of the ACLU but it's clear they don't really value egalitarian democracy all that much. The little boy with one finger in the dike as he drills new holes in it is the perfect logo for it.
White's position is pretty much the constitutional position, but that's the problem with decisions like Heller. It changes more than it means to, and there is no allowing for the unforeseen. So the law needs to catch up. The real problem is the decision to decide what is "constitutional," and what isn't. The Warren court opened this Pandora's box meaning only to do good. But once begun it can't be stopped, and you pave the way for Scalia and Heller.
ReplyDeleteSo now we have this mess.
I've been intending to get around to reading all of Louis Boudin's (of all people) book about the danger of judicial government.
DeleteI wish we could adopt a more modern Constitution that took into account all of the problems that have come from the original one. But it's not going to come within my lifetime.