NationStates Jolt Archive

I might be a little behind the times, but has anyone else seen this (http://melbourne.indymedia.org/news/2005/08/94598_comment.php#94693) article decrying Max Barry and NationStates as a breeding ground for Nazis?

Neo-Nazis Using Kensington Author's Website to Organize
by no pasaran Saturday August 13, 2005 at 07:46 AM


Nationstates.net, an online gaming site registered in the name of and based on author Max Barry's novel, Jennifer Government, is being used by hate groups in Canada, the US and elsewhere to organize and recruit new members online.

PLEASE REPOST WIDELY!

An online gaming site based on Kensington, Victoria author Max Barry's novel, Jennifer Government, is currently being used by Neo-Nazi and White Power groups to organize and recruit new members online, through message boards and forums hosted by the site.

Barry's second novel, Jennifer Government has received very good reviews and the movie rights have just been bought with a movie deal sure to follow. The book is a sardonic and witty dark comedy about corporations run amuck through unrestricted capitalism. Many have said the book contains a strong anti-globalist stance, although Barry denies that his views are in line with anti-globalists. He is a well-received and successful author perhaps set to follow in the footsteps of successful Fight Club author Chuck Palahniuk.

Which makes this second part too important to ignore.

Barry created a game site where players create their own nations and play politics with each other, called http://www.nationstates.net. No wars, just build your nation and debate with each other on forums or through an online United Nations.

After visiting the site, it became obvious that the only editorial policy was about each nation's flag, which cannot contain "a swastika or nudity," although other common Nazi and White Power symbols are perfectly fine. Forums are even less moderated and frequent threads are being posted such as, "How Jews oppress the mentally ill."

It seems as though Neo-nazis have flocked to the site to create nations of their own. Nations, in gameplay, are part of regions that function as small networks. Each region has its own forum, as well as other forums hosted by a linked site, free of charge. Nazis soon began creating their own regions, including links to external sites and racist bulletin boards such as Stormfront.

When asked about how they were going to respond to hate groups using the site for message boards, the moderator proceeded to lecture about game rules and terms of service. In other words, they blew it off.

Searching the NationStates region list, I came across a number of mini-sites within the game controlled by white power activists and being used to promote hate. They include (just Search in the Region drop-box on the main page):

4th Reich SS,
Nazi Deutschland Axis,
The URAP,
NAZI EUROPE,
The NSIA,
Aryanised Europe,
Vichy France,
The United Axis,
Leftists here (a game region taken over by nazis where they threaten to hang "race traitors"),
Idaho,
Supreme Nazi Europe,
Axis Powers,
Norselandic Warriors Front,
the Prussian Reich,
the Fascist Powers,
White Aryan Resistance...and perhaps more I have simply not discovered yet, with nearly two-hundred user accounts with names such as The Holy Empire of Aryanville, The Nazi Empire of One Reich 1488, etc., including links to these bulletin boards:
http://s9.invisionfree.com/The_NSIA/index.php?
http://s12.invisionfree.com/The_Fascist_Powers
http://thearyanarmy.proboards61.com/index.cgi

Why is this important? The site is accessed by thousands of players. It is prime recruitment ground for White Power groups, and by allowing them free space for their message boards, Nationstates.net is practically handing them recruits. As a prominent author whose second novel is soon to become a movie, Max Barry should know better. Let him know what's up with the website.

Freedom of speech doesn't mean tolerating hate or letting hate groups use his website's services.

Please contact Max Barry and ask him to take a stand against hate groups on the internet by revising the site's editorial policy to stop them from organizing. Each recruit they get equals another racist attack.

No more hate in online games!

email him:
Max_Barry@maxbarry.com or
max_barry@yahoo.com

write him:<edited out>

or phone him:
from Australia: <edited out>
international: <edited out>

It's up to all of us to put racists where they belong.


It seems that people are offended by Mr. Barry's insistence on a free exchange of ideas, because certain ideas offend them. As distasteful as National Socialism may be, they are still entitled to express their opinions. Mr. Barry has repeatedly stated he does not want to censor anyone's political beliefs, so long as they are stated civily. But for these people, this is not good enough. They want Nazis banned from this site because they do not believe they are entitled to free speech.

I hope I am not alone in my disgust for this attempt to censor distasteful opinions. If we always censored all opinions that are unpopular with a group of people, then no one would say anything. I am not sure how successful this e-mail camapaign of theirs has been (perhaps the moderators could be so kind as to find out), but I would like to start our own counter-e-mail campaign, telling them that we support Max Barry's tolerance of ALL opinions, good or bad, and that we do not appreciate an outside effort to tell us what is and isn't acceptable for us to read.

Here is their contact page (http://melbourne.indymedia.org/contact.php). The subject should be "Re: Neo-Nazis Using Kensington Author's Website to Organize". I am unable to find a way to contact the author himself, though if anyone finds a way, that would be great.

I hope I am not alone in this. Thank you. :)

And I don't get what the big deal is anyway. Nazi posters get chewed up and spit out whenever they start their rhetoric. :D

Some people's attitudes are mind-boggling

Tho I am curious to know if people are being recruited off here? Cos if that's the case, how come nobody wants me? :p

As distasteful as National Socialism may be, they are still entitled to express their opinions
You said it all.

Ah, the pettiness of the tiny mind strikes again!

See my signature for an explanation of this phenomenon.

:p

He's obviously got a nation in NS spying on Nazi regions.
Let's find it eh?

Always wanted to be a Neo-NAZI. Time to shave my head!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
WooHoo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I am annoyed with your use of "Fascism" and "Nazi".

"Neo-Nazis Using Kensington Author's Website to Organize"
"Fascism vs. NationStates"

They are two different things, do not mix them up.

Nazism is a perversion of Fascism into something completely evil.

Someone has never heard of Role play! :rolleyes:

I am annoyed with your use of "Fascism" and "Nazi".

"Neo-Nazis Using Kensington Author's Website to Organize"
"Fascism vs. NationStates"

They are two different things, do not mix them up.

Nazism is a perversion of Fascism into something completely evil.

The people wishing to censor NationStates to their personal whims are the fascists. The Nazis are the ones that they wish to censor. I did not mix anything up. Fascist is what I called them. Not Nazi.

TM, Sdaeriji

Either way, I do disagree with you. People like that do not deserve "Freedom of Speech".

This is one way in which Democracy is hypocritical.

"Freedom of Speech" and "All men are created equal". The former, if preaching such racist views, infringes on the latter. In my eyes, the latter is far more important than being able to express how one group of people "sux".

What would you prefer? A society where you can say and do what you want, and certain groups of people live in fear as a result, or a society where everyone, EVERYONE, is treated equally, fairly and have no rights infringed upon?

Man, if he thinks it's bad now, he should have been around when I started. Hell, back then a nazi was one of the most popular posters. Nowadays it's pretty rare for a nazi to pop up-it's almost like nostalgia...

A lot of Nazi nations/regions are just people roleplaying outside their own beliefs. Where are they recruiting people on this site anyway? It's obviously not on the general forum, we haven't had a decent run of nazi's in years. It's pretty hard to recruit people through regional boards anyway, especially when you're so filled with hate.

It is all true what's written in this article. There are a lot of nazi and fascist regions in here and we share the same ground as they do, just as in real life. In my opinion, freedom of speech is just a comfortable argument such persons hide behind to say things that have nothing to do with any freedom at all, but just with hatred!
If such "role play" was to be banned from Nation States, I would be for it a 100%!

It is all true what's written in this article. There are a lot of nazi and fascist regions in here and we share the same ground as they do, just as in real life. In my opinion, freedom of speech is just a comfortable argument such persons hide behind to say things that have nothing to do with any freedom at all, but just with hatred!
If such "role play" was to be banned from Nation States, I would be for it a 100%!


Again, another person seeing no difference between Fascism and Nazism.

While I agree with getting rid of people who support racism and racist ideals, fascism is just a totalitarian government, invented by Mussolini, which had no connection with Nazis until he was influenced by Hitler, and even then, it wasn't much. Mussolini was loved by his people, but that changed when he brought in Anti Semetic laws. He has landed 35th place in the 100 greatest Italians.

Either way, I do disagree with you. People like that do not deserve "Freedom of Speech".

This is one way in which Democracy is hypocritical.

"Freedom of Speech" and "All men are created equal". The former, if preaching such racist views, infringes on the latter. In my eyes, the latter is far more important than being able to express how one group of people "sux".

What would you prefer? A society where you can say and do what you want, and certain groups of people live in fear as a result, or a society where everyone, EVERYONE, is treated equally, fairly and have no rights infringed upon?

Then what do you do to deserve freedom of speech? What makes your beliefs immune to censorship? Because you don't think there's anything wrong with them? People may very easily disagree with you. I disagree with you.

There is a world of difference between preaching hatred and practicing hatred. I could say "Jews are scum" all day long and it would not affect a single soul in any measurable way. People may get offended, and I may get my ass kicked as a result, but it would not harm anyone.

I would prefer a society where people were allowed to say and do what they wanted so long as it did not infringe upon the rights of anyone else. No one has the right to not be offended by something they hear. In your society, people are not all treated fairly and equally, because you are telling certain groups of people that they are not allowed to speak their minds because you find it distasteful.

It is all true what's written in this article. There are a lot of nazi and fascist regions in here and we share the same ground as they do, just as in real life. In my opinion, freedom of speech is just a comfortable argument such persons hide behind to say things that have nothing to do with any freedom at all, but just with hatred!
If such "role play" was to be banned from Nation States, I would be for it a 100%!
It's you, isn't it?

It is all true what's written in this article. There are a lot of nazi and fascist regions in here and we share the same ground as they do, just as in real life. In my opinion, freedom of speech is just a comfortable argument such persons hide behind to say things that have nothing to do with any freedom at all, but just with hatred!
If such "role play" was to be banned from Nation States, I would be for it a 100%!

Why? Why should they be banned? How have they harmed anyone here in any way?

People seem very eager to ban speech that they find ugly without realizing that they could be treated similiarly.

I didn't say totally abolish Freedom of Speech, rather abolish total Freedom of Speech, that allows one to say and do things that infringe and offend certain groups in society.

Saying "Jews are scum" is offensive, in my eyes, completely wrong, and saying such things should not be allowed.

Speaking your mind... If I were to drone on for hours about how bad blacks, Jews, foreigners, non religious people etc... Are completely stupid, and should be discriminated against, you honestly wouldn't care?

If such words effect you, you would be offended, and request an apology, something, anything.

Racism has no place in society, and should not be encouraged.

Why? Why should they be banned? How have they harmed anyone here in any way?

People seem very eager to ban speech that they find ugly without realizing that they could be treated similiarly.I'm personnaly offended by them too, but I'll let them live while they remain in their regions and "roleplay". If they linger into General though or try to recruit me, they're open game though...

People seem very eager to ban speech that they find ugly without realizing that they could be treated similiarly.
You keep hitting the nail on the head. :)

I'm personnaly offended by them too, but I'll let them live while they remain in their regions and "roleplay". If they linger into General though or try to recruit me, they're open game though...

I'm sure I'll be accused of being a Nazi racist pig by the 50th post on this thread. People are bound to misinterpret what I am saying as "Nazis are right!"

Being treated similarly? What?

If those people get into power, I'd be forced to be a racist, or what are you talking about?

If you have a group in a society, one that wants to attack other groups, but mostly stays dormant... But flails out once every so often, then people say: "Oh look at those evil people blah blah blah". While the solution to the problem is to simply get rid of them before they are able to commit such acts, or stop them from being able to commit such acts.

I didn't say totally abolish Freedom of Speech, rather abolish total Freedom of Speech, that allows one to say and do things that infringe and offend certain groups in society.

Saying "Jews are scum" is offensive, in my eyes, completely wrong, and saying such things should not be allowed.

Speaking your mind... If I were to drone on for hours about how bad blacks, Jews, foreigners, non religious people etc... Are completely stupid, and should be discriminated against, you honestly wouldn't care?

If such words effect you, you would be offended, and request an apology, something, anything.

Racism has no place in society, and should not be encouraged.

You wish to remove the freedom of speech from people whose opinions you find wrong. What keeps your opinions from facing similar censorship? Why are your opinions different?

You keep hitting the nail on the head. :)I don't know. There's a difference between freedom of speech and displaying a swastika on your flag...

Being treated similarly? What?

Having your beliefs censored because they are considered "wrong".

I don't know. There's a difference between freedom of speech and displaying a swastika on your flag...

How?

You wish to remove the freedom of speech from people whose opinions you find wrong. What keeps your opinions from facing similar censorship? Why are your opinions different?



Simply, their opinions are very wrong. They incite religious and racial hatred, which is NOT a good thing, which hinders productivity and a better society.


Who would censor an opinion that is against racial and religious hatred? A crazed Nazi bastard?

My opinions are different because they're sensible, fair and constitute a better society, one without hatred or fear from extremists.

You wish to remove the freedom of speech from people whose opinions you find wrong. What keeps your opinions from facing similar censorship? Why are your opinions different?Sdaeriji, there's a difference between not agreeing with someone and feeling offended by them. I disagree with a lot of people, but I wouldn't want them silenced.

Sdaeriji, there's a difference between not agreeing with someone and feeling offended by them. I disagree with a lot of people, but I wouldn't want them silenced.

Uh, I believe you. That comment wasn't directed at you, but at Irish Empire.

How?I don't mind someone saying their opinion, even if I disagree, if it has a sound logical arguement to it and they are being civil. Displaying the symbols of an ideology based on the eradication of other people due to heritage is not civil. It's extremely disrespectful of my history and what my country did.
I disagree with people on the accounts of whether or not the War in Iraq was legal, but they tend to give me real arguements, and not "because I like the white race better" in a discussion.

I don't know. There's a difference between freedom of speech and displaying a swastika on your flag...
Max Berry can make whatever rules he wants for his website. I don’t care. It’s his.

Really, it’s just “hate speech” laws that I can’t stand.

Simply, their opinions are very wrong. They incite religious and racial hatred, which is NOT a good thing, which hinders productivity and a better society.


Who would censor an opinion that is against racial and religious hatred? A crazed Nazi bastard?


Your OTHER opinions. Surely you have more than one. You must believe strongly in something that a lot of people disagree with. What if people decided one day that you weren't allowed to voice your opinions on religion or politics because they thought they were wrong?


My opinions are different because they're sensible, fair and constitute a better society, one without hatred or fear from extremists.

According to who? You? What makes you an authority on sensibility, fairness, or the betterment of society? I personally find your desire to outlaw unpopular beliefs extremely wrong. Can I now censor you?

I'm sure I'll be accused of being a Nazi racist pig by the 50th post on this thread. People are bound to misinterpret what I am saying as "Nazis are right!"Hehe, I've been called a Nazi for much less... :rolleyes:

Forums are even less moderated and frequent threads are being posted such as, "How Jews oppress the mentally ill."


They clearly didn't go to the trouble of reading that thread.although i didnt read it all i recall their being something about 'Space-Jews' in the opening post.somehow i don't think it was to be taken seriously,they didnt even go out of their way to link the thread in their article because if you read it it doesn't support their arguement.

Even if Nationstates.net was a hotbed for facisim,who cares?anyone stupid enought to go posting thing like 'i hate all jews'(or any other group for that matter) would prob get dozens of posts about how he/she is being a discriminating idiot.

Uh, I believe you. That comment wasn't directed at you, but at Irish Empire.


Either way he is right.

If, for example, you had your neighbour hoist up a Swastika, will you sit idly by and say "Oooh, he's expressing himself." or, if your friend starts wearing the KKK outfit at random times, will you just laugh it off and say "Good joke"?

It's bad enough for someone to speak out against a racial or religious group in society, but to start displaying racist symbols etc... Is another step up.


Unpopular beliefs? God no. Many things are unpopular, but I don't ban them.

Racism is completely different than my views, obviously - as they're the exact opposite. You dislike my views, me: Wanting to get rid of racism. You: Wanting to uphold Freedom of Speech, including racists. If I were to ban unpopular things, hey, I wouldn't even be argueing here, would I?

I don't mind someone saying their opinion, even if I disagree, if it has a sound logical arguement to it and they are being civil. Displaying the symbols of an ideology based on the eradication of other people due to heritage is not civil. It's extremely disrespectful of my history and what my country did.
I disagree with people on the accounts of whether or not the War in Iraq was legal, but they tend to give me real arguements, and not "because I like the white race better" in a discussion.

Then disagree with the person displaying the symbols. Yell, scream, curse at them. The wonder of free speech is that it works the same for everyone. Just as that person has every right to display his beliefs in a manner that does not harm anyone, you have the right to call him a giant flaming douchebag that should rot in hell.

They clearly didn't go to the trouble of reading that thread.although i didnt read it all i recall their being something about 'Space-Jews' in the opening post.somehow i don't think it was to be taken seriously,they didnt even go out of their way to link the thread in their article because if you read it it doesn't support their arguement.Jeez, they quoted that one? I thought it was racist when all I had was the name and the title to go by, but when I looked at it the worst I'd call it was "tactless" and that was mainly because of his name...

Either way he is right.

If, for example, you had your neighbour hoist up a Swastika, will you sit idly by and say "Oooh, he's expressing himself." or, if your friend starts wearing the KKK outfit at random times, will you just laugh it off and say "Good joke"?

It's bad enough for someone to speak out against a racial or religious group in society, but to start displaying racist symbols etc... Is another step up.

No, I would tell them exactly how much I disagreed with them and how I thought they should take it down. I would then proceed to tell them what a miserable, worthless pile of human refuse they were, and that I hoped their children would be born with severe birth defects. But, like how I have the right to tell them all those wonderful things, they have the right to display their perverted opinions anywhere they are legally allowed to.

Then disagree with the person displaying the symbols. Yell, scream, curse at them. The wonder of free speech is that it works the same for everyone. Just as that person has every right to display his beliefs in a manner that does not harm anyone, you have the right to call him a giant flaming douchebag that should rot in hell.Not in my country he doesn't. There's a link to a German police site that lists all the banned symbols, which I appreciate. The reason that's done is because those symbols do incredible harm when used outside of a historical context.

Then disagree with the person displaying the symbols. Yell, scream, curse at them. The wonder of free speech is that it works the same for everyone. Just as that person has every right to display his beliefs in a manner that does not harm anyone, you have the right to call him a giant flaming douchebag that should rot in hell.


No, because that achieves nothing. That is reducing yourself to a pitiful level.

You oppose racism, that is something noble. You don't run about saying: "g0m 0gm!1! joo sux!1", as that's basically what they're doing.

We have anti-racist laws for a reason. Racist symbols are banned for a reason.

Why allow them to voice their racist opinions?

Not in my country he doesn't. There's a link to a German police site that lists all the banned symbols, which I appreciate. The reason that's done is because those symbols do incredible harm when used outside of a historical context.

What harm do they do, besides emotional distress?

Why allow them to voice their racist opinions?

Because everyone is entitled to their opinions, and as long as we allow other people to voice their opinions, then they should be afforded the same rights.

You confuse speech with action. There is nothing inherently harmful in racist beliefs. It is acting upon those beliefs that is harmful, and should not be allowed.

Incite hatred.


Look at N.Ireland as a prime example.

What harm do they do, besides emotional distress?
Emotional "distress" is enough. It's usually hard to explain to people that haven't grown up here. If someone puts up a flag like that and says "the holocaust didn't exist", it makes me and a lot of others feel like violating his other human rights.

I find your baseless attack on Max Barry for establishing NationStates as a forum for people to express their views in an open exchange of ideas to be an abhorrent display of ignorance and hypocrisy.

Let me make it perfectly clear that I find Nazi views to be reprehensible. Let me also make it perfectly clear that I am opposed to discrimination. However, I am stridently against any attempts to stifle the views of people who wish to express their opinions, even if they differ greatly from my own. One of the main tenets of a free society is the ability of people to express their views without fear of government reprisal.

One of the biggest problems I see with your blanket opposition to Barry's forums allowing the free exercise of speech is the fact that many of the people who post on the fora are roleplaying. In some cases, they choose to roleplay as a National Socialist regime. That doesn't necessarily mean they subscribe to those views. I've seen people roleplay as religious fundamentalists who make harrassing religious fundamentalists one of their real life hobbies. I've seen people who espouse National Socialist views in character who condemn those in real life.

If you don't agree with someone, argue against their opinion with facts. If you don't want to hear what they have to say, use the tools provided to ignore their ramblings. The Jolt forum that hosts the NationStates game allows you to put a user on your Ignore list so you don't have to read their posts unless you click on a link that allows you to.

If the majority ruled that minority viewpoints could be squelched, it would only be a matter of time before homosexuals would be oppressed in the name of "what the people want." Do you want to live in a world where you could be punished for thinking outside the mainstream? I sure wouldn't.

By providing a forum for people to express their views, Max Barry does not by extension endorse the views of everyone who chooses to take advantage of that opportunity. We can not hope to solve the problems borne by aberrant views by hiding our collective heads in the sand and pretending they don't exist. We have to deal with the problems head on by getting them out in the open.

Emotional "distress" is enough. It's usually hard to explain to people that haven't grown up here. If someone puts up a flag like that and says "the holocaust didn't exist", it makes me and a lot of others feel like violating his other human rights.

That is not your right. Call him a sick fuck if you wish, but you do not have the right to harm him because you disagree, and something should not be illegal just because those opposed cannot control themselves.

harsh article. I never thought I'd be called a neo-nazi by playing a game during the monotonous summer days.

Apparently, you do not care about making people feel bad, inadequate, less than the race/religion of the person insulting them, belittling them.

If you do not combat racism, you're letting racism win.

Good job Sarz.

Incite hatred.


Look at N.Ireland as a prime example.

Such as "Kill all Jews" being different than "Jews are scum"? I agree, completely. I still do not believe that "Jews are scum" should be banned just because others will say "Kill all Jews". Charge the ones inciting to violence as much as is legally allowed, but do not ban all speech of a certain vein just because some are capable of taking it too far.

Such as "Kill all Jews" being different than "Jews are scum"? I agree, completely. I still do not believe that "Jews are scum" should be banned just because others will say "Kill all Jews". Charge the ones inciting to violence as much as is legally allowed, but do not ban all speech of a certain vein just because some are capable of taking it too far.


By going back several posts, apparently you've seemed to miss some others.

Apparently, you do not care about making people feel bad, inadequate, less than the race/religion of the person insulting them, belittling them.

If you do not combat racism, you're letting racism win.

I do care about making people feel bad, inadequate, less than the race/religion of the person insulting them, belittling them. That is why I would never do such things, and I would argue vehemently the person saying such things. Still, he is entitled to his opinions, just as I am, no matter how sickening I find them.

That is not your right. Call him a sick fuck if you wish, but you do not have the right to harm him because you disagree, and something should not be illegal just because those opposed cannot control themselves.Hence I said "feel". I wouldn't do it, but I'd have to try real hard not to. I have to live with seeing these idiots every time I go shopping at my local supermarket, knowing that if a group of them discovered that I'm American and caught me alone after dark I'd get the shit beaten out of me. Freedom of speech is a nice thing, but it doesn't allow insulting people. That is against the law in Germany regardless of whether or not it is in a racist context.

So you'll sit idly by whilst a racist belittles someone?

If you cared, you would stop it before it could even happen. Before that person gets insulted. Not after, not during but before.

Heh, this place is so liberal im suprised there are any nazis here, lol....although I have been called a fascist before. :)

I think what it all means is that if any of us were given complete control over a country, we'd all be a bit dictatorial.

Apparently, you do not care about making people feel bad, inadequate, less than the race/religion of the person insulting them, belittling them.

If you do not combat racism, you're letting racism win.You don't "combat" racism by squelching it and hiding your head in the sand and patting yourself on the back for getting rid of it. You fight racism by using your right of Freedom of Speech to speak out against it. If you hear someone make an ethnic joke, don't laugh. Tell them you find it offensive. If someone uses the word "gay" to mean "stupid," call them on it. I've been known to start arguments when someone says, "that's so gay."

If you believe in the First Amendment, it also gives you the right not to associate with those whose opinions differ from your own. So turn off Ann Coulter. Don't buy her book. Draw devil horns and a moustache on her likeness if you wish. But don't squelch her right to make herself look like the idiot she is.

So you'll sit idly by whilst a racist belittles someone?

If you cared, you would stop it before it could even happen. Before that person gets insulted. Not after, not during but before.He's not argueing against confronting Nazis, he's argueing against banning them. There's a difference.

Heh, this place is so liberal im suprised there are any nazis here, lol....although I have been called a fascist before. :)

Actually, these people should be on their knees worshipping Mr. Barry. In the past, this place was crawling with Nazi-wannabes and their grammatical disaster posts.

So you'll sit idly by whilst a racist belittles someone?

If you cared, you would stop it before it could even happen. Before that person gets insulted. Not after, not during but before.

We are getting dangerously close to calling me a Nazi. Though it is past post 50. :(

So the campaign author is a moron. Big deal. NS won't suffer.

I'm not American, I do not go by American laws, nor your Consitution, therefore, no I do not believe in another countries Constitution.

Using that Freedom of Speech - Have you tried it?

Example:

Person A: *Minding their own business*
Person B: "You're an Islamic fuck! All of you terrorist wankers should be killed!"

Person A: "I find that offensive."
Person B: "Oh you find that offensive!? I FIND YOU FUCKS KILLING US OFFENSIVE BLAH BLAH BLAH!!1!12"
Person B: *Takes out a knife*


Ooooh, so effective. You may also replace person A in the second part with a third party.


You combat racism head on, stop it, or at best, hinder it from being able to do such acts, if not that, be able to be prosecuted in a court of law.
We have anti racist laws here, I feel they're inadequate, but better than nothing.

I'm not American, I do not go by American laws, nor your Consitution, therefore, no I do not believe in another countries Constitution.

Using that Freedom of Speech - Have you tried it?

Example:

Person A: *Minding their own business*
Person B: "You're an Islamic fuck! All of you terrorist wankers should be killed!"

Person A: "I find that offensive."
Person B: "Oh you find that offensive!? I FIND YOU FUCKS KILLING US OFFENSIVE BLAH BLAH BLAH!!1!12"
Person B: *Takes out a knife*


Ooooh, so effective. You may also replace person A in the second part with a third party.


You combat racism head on, stop it, or at best, hinder it from being able to do such acts, if not that, be able to be prosecuted in a court of law.
We have anti racist laws here, I feel they're inadequate, but better than nothing.

I find your opinons offensive. They should be banned. They are wrong.

We are getting dangerously close to calling me a Nazi. Though it is past post 50. :(


Don't worry, I will not call you a Nazi. I know how offensive that is.

As you can see, you're distressed about it.

Don't worry, I will not call you a Nazi. I know how offensive that is.

As you can see, you're distressed about it.

I am not distressed about it. But as soon as someone invokes Godwin's law against me, I will take my leave of this thread, as the debate will have ended.

I find your opinons offensive. They should be banned. They are wrong.


Ok, now THIS can seriously be considered pro racist views.

I am anti racist. You're saying my views are wrong and offensive.

As you can see, in an example, fighting words with words with an unstable crazed racist, who could be a potential Neo Nazi or KKK member will most likely NOT work. Especially in a country like the US, where guns and other lethal weapons are readily available.

It really sucks how some people who are on the same side can get so divided about it. Have you noticed that we didn't get any unteachables commenting on this thread yet?

Ok, now THIS can seriously be considered pro racist views.

I am anti racist. You're saying my views are wrong and offensive.

As you can see, in an example, fighting words with words with an unstable crazed racist, who could be a potential Neo Nazi or KKK member will most likely NOT work. Especially in a country like the US, where guns and other lethal weapons are readily available.

Do you not see my point? Who is to decide whose opinions are right and whose are wrong? You wish to ban views opposed to your own, but what if one day it is decided that your opinions are taboo? I realize that the slippery slope is a logical fallacy, but can you not see how banning unsavory views could one day work against you?

Ok, now THIS can seriously be considered pro racist views.

I am anti racist. You're saying my views are wrong and offensive.

As you can see, in an example, fighting words with words with an unstable crazed racist, who could be a potential Neo Nazi or KKK member will most likely NOT work. Especially in a country like the US, where guns and other lethal weapons are readily available.He's pointing out the fallacy of your argument by using your words against you. It IS wrong to squelch people for espousing views you disagree with. I find the attempt to suppress another person's opinions offensive.

It really sucks how some people who are on the same side can get so divided about it. Have you noticed that we didn't get any unteachables commenting on this thread yet?

People with actual racist views rarely speak them in an environment like this. They prefer to stay where they are unchallenged. It helps maintain the illusion that they are somehow correct.

He's pointing out the fallacy of your argument by using your words against you. It IS wrong to squelch people for espousing views you disagree with. I find the attempt to suppress another person's opinions offensive.

I understand that, but there's a fundemental difference between being ANTI RACIST and allowing ANYONE to run about and say what they want, and being allowed to infringe on others.

We have that in our societies, I.e. anti racist laws in Ireland, France, Germany etc... And it's better than nothing, though not adequate enough, so why allow racism?

It is NOT productive, it is infringing on others, it offends others, it makes people feel inadequate. It is too late to intervene (Especially with "g0m!1 joo fagg0t2!1" as your only offence) when it is being committed, or after. If needs to be stopped before someone is insulted, belittled, offended or made to feel inadequate.

If you cannot easily tell the difference between a good view and a bad view (In this case, I am only argueing racism, not anything else), such as racism, then you must be mentally retarded (No offence intended.)

Freedom of speech is paramount. Take a British example: keeping the BNP out of the public eye serves no good purpose. Exposing their bullshit in public is vitally important. Let them preach their hatred and lies and rip them apart, tear to pieces their fallacies and fuck them good and proper.

Freedom of speech is paramount. Take a British example: keeping the BNP out of the public eye serves no good purpose. Exposing their bullshit in public is vitally important. Let them preach their hatred and lies and rip them apart, tear to pieces their fallacies and fuck them good and proper.


Or simply, like the pro-Nazi party in Ireland during the early '30s, ban them.

Why? Because there are people who LOVE their racist views, they will then vote them. They will then get several MPs, yes it's not a lot, but it's more than none. And they can make a difference on a small local council.

Wasn't that thread about the Jews oppressing the mentally ill on here just a few days ago?

In any case, I greatly resent this portrayal of NS. NSers know that there is a very wide range of opinion here...the last thing we are is a 'recruiting ground' for one particular skewed ideology. And that comment about the mod 'blowing it off' by discussing the rules...I think the rules adequately address the inherent difficulties of free speech. I for one have never felt that any hateful group was allowed to single-mindedly blast NSers or promote propaganda...but I have been able to glean some insight into a world view so alien from my own, and I consider this to be a good thing.

This just pisses me off.

it´s the age-old paradox of democracy: should democracy tolerate schoolls of thought that openly advocate intolereance and, although only in the intelectual field, defend the downthrow of democracy? Musn´t democracies stablish core values that cannot be put in question or discussed by its citizens, such as the democatic sistem of governement, respect for all races and creeds and everithing we associate with western-style democracies? Should free speech, a paramount value of democracy, be denied to anti-democrats? Some defend that if free speech had been denied to Hiler and the NASPD in the 1930´s, the Weimar republic would never have been overthrown-although by perfectly democratic means. The governement in Argelia defended its option to outlaw FIS, the leading islamic movement, because the said movement had won the popular vote and would set up a fundamentalist governement that would basically abolish elections and democracy altogether. Of course, if we accept such ways, then another matter emerges: should we abolish only fascist or nazi movements? But what of other political firebrands, like the comunists and the far-left? Don´t they also advocate hate speech? And what of radical islamic clerics in the West?
In short, i believe that all matters of opinions should be granted the right to free speech in a democratic society...political ideologies shoulb compete in a free market on equal terms, as any other comodity...it´s up to the consumer to choose, and up to true democrats to make a solid case for democracy(and not just reap the benefits of free market ecomomies and leave political discussion to the politicians), and let others who don´t think likewise do the same. ;)

Or simply, like the pro-Nazi party in Ireland during the early '30s, ban them.

Why? Because there are people who LOVE their racist views, they will then vote them. They will then get several MPs, yes it's not a lot, but it's more than none. And they can make a difference on a small local council.

Do you continue to not understand how anyone could potentially ban anyone else's opinions, or do you remain assured that your opinions are so universally correct that it would never happen to you?

Do you continue to not understand how anyone could potentially ban anyone else's opinions, or do you remain assured that your opinions are so universally correct that it would never happen to you?


Oh, so anti racist views are not correct? Fine then.
I didn't realise that being a humane person, who wants unity amongst the different groups in society, is JUST as wrong as being a racist. Woooow, I'd love to live in America.

There is nothing, absolutely nothing, wrong with banning racism. It protects the people that racist groups prey upon. It protects the immigrants, the minorities... Oh, but you want the racist minority to have as much say as the immigrant minority, whereby then the immigrant minority is oppressed.

I fail to see any logic in that.


Edit:

What would have happened during WWII if we didn't ban the Irish Nazi party? Well? They were literally about to do a "March on Dublin", obviously like the March on Rome that gave Mussolini power, as they were very pro Nazi, they would have allied with Hitler. Granting access to Britain.

Now, if you were in power, you would have said: "Oooh, Freedom of Speech!1" correct? Obviously. Thank God you weren't Taoisech at the time.

Or simply, like the pro-Nazi party in Ireland during the early '30s, ban them.

Why? Because there are people who LOVE their racist views, they will then vote them. They will then get several MPs, yes it's not a lot, but it's more than none. And they can make a difference on a small local council.
Sorry, but the US has this (and not a lot else) right. Banning such views keeps them festering underground. You have to win the argument in public.

Sorry, but the US has this (and not a lot else) right. Banning such views keeps them festering underground. You have to win the argument in public.


When they are underground, they are weak. What can they do then? Small attacks very seldomly here and there, they get found out, and prosecuted.

Obviously, if the wider majority of society is pushed towards a more unity amongst different groups, there will be less people favouring racist activities etc...

Either way, I do disagree with you. People like that do not deserve "Freedom of Speech".

This is one way in which Democracy is hypocritical.

"Freedom of Speech" and "All men are created equal". The former, if preaching such racist views, infringes on the latter. In my eyes, the latter is far more important than being able to express how one group of people "sux".

What would you prefer? A society where you can say and do what you want, and certain groups of people live in fear as a result, or a society where everyone, EVERYONE, is treated equally, fairly and have no rights infringed upon?

As one of the people targeted by White Supremacists as 'racially inferior', I have to emphatically disagree with you. The more you repress these kinds of ideas, the more attractive they seem...the more their twisted conspiracy theories seem true, the more clandestine and therefore appealing become their organisations, and the less people at large realise what kind of problem these groups can actually be....until it's too late. I live in a province of Canada that is very sparsely populated outside of the two major city centres. We are for the most part a rural, laid back people. And yet one of the most influential white supremacist groups in Canada (with links to other groups in the US) started here. And people didn't take it seriously. But this kind of thing can become very serious.

You want to heal a sore? You don't hide it under bandages indefinitely, muffle it, hide it away. You lance it, you expose it to the air and light. These people may hold ideas that are repugnant to you...as they are to most of us. But you have NO right to hide your head under your pillow of censorship and pretend they don't exist. And you should not be encouraging that sort of sore to fester.

These views are not presented and then never challenged. Far from it! And the hope is, those who have embraced this kind of racist ideology will examine it, and perhaps reconsider its validity. That kind of change can only happen with dialogue.

If you don't agree with someone, argue against their opinion with facts. If you don't want to hear what they have to say, use the tools provided to ignore their ramblings. The Jolt forum that hosts the NationStates game allows you to put a user on your Ignore list so you don't have to read their posts unless you click on a link that allows you to.

exactly. a very good letter!

funnily enough i rarely see nazis post here in General, and when they do (as has already said) they don't last long - the backlash from us posters against them and their hateful ways means they tend to leave pretty quick :p
and i have definatley never seen a single thread for nazi recruitment round here

Oh, so anti racist views are not correct? Fine then.
I didn't realise that being a humane person, who wants unity amongst the different groups in society, is JUST as wrong as being a racist. Woooow, I'd love to live in America.

There is nothing, absolutely nothing, wrong with banning racism. It protects the people that racist groups prey upon. It protects the immigrants, the minorities... Oh, but you want the racist minority to have as much say as the immigrant minority, whereby then the immigrant minority is oppressed.

Um. You can not 'ban racism'. No more than you can impose a law that says, "stop thinking about Jennifer Lopez's big, round, juicy ass". You can not control how people think to that extent. What YOU are talking about is banning the activities associated with racism, and frankly, I think we've done a pretty good job in most Western countries of dealing with that. We have hate crime laws. All other laws also apply to criminals, racist or not that break the social contract.

And the same rhetoric you are using about people voting in a dangerous party, a possibility we must protect them from with laws banning these groups, has been used widely against socialist, communist, labour and humanitarian groups around the world. You say 'protection'. I say, 'bullshit'.

No, you can effectively reduce racism.

Target the young generation. From birth, through schooling, through advertisements, courses and life, bombard them with racial and religious equality, teachings and other things, and how racism is bad. At the same time, have anti racist laws, with stern punishments for those cought. With a multi-cultural society, people, who interact with people of other nationalities, can easily see they're no different. In a matter of years or decades, it will have been reduced, or practically unoticable.


Also: Wounds still heal when bandaged.

You can see, in a situation like Northern Ireland, or the Middle East, there it is not surpreced (If it is, it isn't enough) and it has barely changed. In N.Ireland, the violence has calmed down, but there is still tension and weariness, they're divided into seperate groups. In the Middle East, well you can see for yourself.

Frankly, I found it very educational to read the neo-Nazis' attempts to defend their views on this site. I knew their views were illogical, but seeing exactly what logical errors they were making made it easier for me to debunk them.

The solution to hate speech is not to ban it, but to shine the harsh, unforgiving light of truth on it. It makes the haters crawl back under their rocks and hide.

:p

exactly. a very good letter!

funnily enough i rarely see nazis post here in General, and when they do (as has already said) they don't last long - the backlash from us posters against them and their hateful ways means they tend to leave pretty quick :p
and i have definatley never seen a single thread for nazi recruitment round here



You know, the worst forum ever for Nazis was Axis of Justice *Shudder* there, they had no control over banning. So there was one prominent Nazi who never shut up, no matter what people said (And everyone felt this way) he never went away. Infact, the complete opposite happened. He loved it when they insulted him. As far as I know, another person like him, when AoJ went down, created his own site - I'd hate to even think what that's like.

Again, another person seeing no difference between Fascism and Nazism.

While I agree with getting rid of people who support racism and racist ideals, fascism is just a totalitarian government, invented by Mussolini, which had no connection with Nazis until he was influenced by Hitler, and even then, it wasn't much. Mussolini was loved by his people, but that changed when he brought in Anti Semetic laws. He has landed 35th place in the 100 greatest Italians.


I agree with you about some matters, like the need of democracy to defend itself from the enemies working from the inside, eroding its principles like freedom of speech right by using them; but allow me to clear one important point.
mussolini was NOT loved by his people, not more than stalin, franco, hitler or the recent pinochet, ceausescu, pol pot. that's how dictatorship works, all in all: you cannot have but the favor of a slight percentage of your people, then you must take the power by force.
but a loved and esteemed leader doesn't need violence and fraud to reach the head of a nation.
and speaking about the racist ideals which in your opinion fascism didn't support, bear in mind that one of their main aims was the founding of an italian empire in africa (heh, where else?). terribly late colonialism based on the assumption to "deserve" an empire, just like many of the european potencies of those years, in complete lack of interest for the african nations they set their aim on: libya and ethiopia. I'll say more: important fascist journalists of that period like Indro Montanelli insisted on the need to dominate the assaulted populations, avoiding a fair treatment right because the negroes were considered inferior to the white men.
so, it is such a mistake to consider italian early fascism completely alien to racism. it is only that hitler's radical hate for jews, gypsies and negroes is, so to speak, better known.

You combat racism head on, stop it, or at best, hinder it from being able to do such acts, if not that, be able to be prosecuted in a court of law.
We have anti racist laws here, I feel they're inadequate, but better than nothing.

Note the views expressed in the above post mimic perfectly the background model of National Socialism (aka Fascism, AKA Nazism).

Laws against racist acts is one thing; banning thought; on the other hand, is completely different.

The purpose of freedom of speech is to freely express ones ideas. This does not grant the right to ACT on those ideas. The purpose of granting rights EQUALLY (which is the purpose of equality, equality under the law)... Everyone has the right to freely express their ideas and beliefs, and everyone is free to express their opinions on those ideas and beliefs, for and against. As long as a person does not act to hinder the rights of another (and no, there is no such thing as a right not to be offended by something) they are free to express them.

Freedom comes with a price; that price is ensuring everyone else (including those who disagree with you, or hold opinions opposed with yours) have the same "rights" you possess.

You would do good to memorize the Paine quote in my signature; before you begin intitiating and supporting precedents that will lead to your own ideas and beliefs being outlawed.

and i have definatley never seen a single thread for nazi recruitment round here

Clearly. Recruitment threads are illegal. :p

This sounds a bit familiar...a few changes, and voila! You could be Pinochet!

No, you can effectively reduce socialsm.

Target the young generation. From birth, through schooling, through advertisements, courses and life, bombard them with anti-socialist information, religious justification for inequality, teachings and other things, and how socialism is bad. At the same time, have anti socialist laws, with stern punishments for those caught. With a anti-socialistsociety, people, who interact with people who have also been taught to denigrate socialism, can easily see that socialism can never work. In a matter of years or decades, it will have been reduced, or practically unnoticable.

I can't believe they mentioned the How Jews oppress the mentally ill thread, of all things. They could have chosen any number of actual threads by real nazi-types, but they chose a stupid joke thread whose main purpose is light hearted spam that the mods simply haven't gotten around to cleaning up yet. ;)

And please. "Recruitment ground" for white power groups? Buahahaha! Yes, I have to admit it is... and it's a recruitment ground for capitalist, communist, anarchist, meritocratic, democratic, jewish, islamic, Christian, monarchist, even ludicrist groups as well. Welcome to this little thing called the "internet."

I agree with you about some matters, like the need of democracy to defend itself from the enemies working from the inside, eroding its principles like freedom of speech right by using them; but allow me to clear one important point.
mussolini was NOT loved by his people, not more than stalin, franco, hitler or the recent pinochet, ceausescu, pol pot. that's how dictatorship works, all in all: you cannot have but the favor of a slight percentage of your people, then you must take the power by force.
but a loved and esteemed leader doesn't need violence and fraud to reach the head of a nation.
and speaking about the racist ideals which in your opinion fascism didn't support, bear in mind that one of their main aims was the founding of an italian empire in africa (heh, where else?). terribly late colonialism based on the assumption to "deserve" an empire, just like many of the european potencies of those years, in complete lack of interest for the african nations they set their aim on: libya and ethiopia. I'll say more: important fascist journalists of that period like Indro Montanelli insisted on the need to dominate the assaulted populations, avoiding a fair treatment right because the negroes were considered inferior to the white men.
so, it is such a mistake to consider italian early fascism completely alien to racism. it is only that hitler's radical hate for jews, gypsies and negroes is, so to speak, better known.


Actually, if you think that of Mussolini, then you must have failed history, my most promenant subject. He was loved until the '30s, when his economic reforms started to fail, and he was influenced by Hitler to bring in racist laws.
He has been ranked, in a recent poll, the 35th greatest Italian. If that's not being loved, then I wonder what's the point in a poll for the "100 Greatest Italians" is for, if No.35 is void.

To say that he was completely void of racist views is stupid. Every leader at that time was racist. I mean, Churchill was one of the worst for that.


Note the views expressed in the above post mimic perfectly the background model of National Socialism (aka Fascism, AKA Nazism)

fascism
/fashiz’m/

• noun 1 an authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government.

Nazi
/naatzi/

• noun (pl. Nazis) 1 historical a member of the National Socialist German Workers’ Party. 2 derogatory a person with extreme racist and authoritarian views.


Fascism was created first, as a form of government that ruled without parliament. Nazism was more extreme, had more of a socialist outlook on the economy and had racist views.

I am not the latter. As said before, Godwins Law.

Banning thought, and teaching a generation to be more tolerant are very different things. You, for one, are a very ignorant person.



Sinuhue - Now that's scary o_O

But at anyrate, you can fit anything in there. The principal of the teaching is the same, as you can see from our culture, the effect advertising has on us, make that a bit more extreme, add in teaching during their childhood, and you can teach them anything. Like, elephants are aliens from Mars, and George Bush is secretly a woman.

But for these people, this is not good enough. They want Nazis banned from this site because they do not believe they are entitled to free speech.

actually, i read it as another example of the general battle to get third parties to refuse to provide cheap or free spaces for nazi to recruit and organize in order to have people like myself and the author of the article killed. this is typically done whenever nazi bands organize shows at some bar or whatever - the owner of the bar is called by a number of anti-fascists, informed that they are allowing nazis a platform to organize and recruit from, and that their will be noisy protests outside if they allow the show to go on.

same deal here, though the author does show a shallow understanding of the workings of, for example, the general forum. but he is right that nazis are using this site to recruit. they've said so on racistidiotfront before (any time there has been a nazi influx on the forum it's been linked back to the stormies). they've gone rather quiet in recent months as far as general is concerned - it must be tough to be constantly ridiculed and shown to be idiots by a large population of people who know better, especially when you can't find enough pictures to plausibly make up some bullshit about being another hot nazi chick. but i do not doubt that they are using less transparent methods or recruiting, such as the tg system, to get dumb kids involved in the fucktard movement proper.

free speech is fine - better to have the fuckers out in the open to be laughed at (and beat up the instant they try anything). but i can see the angle against allowing them to use someone else's resources and money to organize and recruit. especially if they are doing it quietly.

Oh, so anti racist views are not correct? Fine then.
I didn't realise that being a humane person, who wants unity amongst the different groups in society, is JUST as wrong as being a racist. Woooow, I'd love to live in America.

There is nothing, absolutely nothing, wrong with banning racism. It protects the people that racist groups prey upon. It protects the immigrants, the minorities... Oh, but you want the racist minority to have as much say as the immigrant minority, whereby then the immigrant minority is oppressed.

I fail to see any logic in that.

Advocating the rights of all people equally to express opinions and beliefs, includes anti-racists as much as racists, in our opinion of things.

We will not "ban" them, because doing such created the very precedent to deny and remove freedoms; including our OWN freedom to express our OWN opinions contrary to those.

While people argue that the "slippery slope" is not an argument; and it isn't societally; it is in matters of law; as soon as you develope a case against one form of "offensive speech" you open precedent to engage against any other form of offensive speech that can be thought of.

As soon as you advocate the removal of the right of someone to advocate, or express racist views; based upon them "offending" someone else: You open the gate to ban:
Capitalistic Views: since some find them offensive
Atheistic Views: since some find them offensive
Communistic Views: since some find them offensive
Socialistic Views: since some find them offensive
Naturalistic Views: since some find them offensive

and so on... People have a right to express their views; people have a right to express opinions against the expressed views of other; people, no where, have a fundamental right not to be offended by the expression of views of another.... They do have a right to speak against those views, however....

Banning acts which impose against the rights of another is a good thing...
Banning thought and speech that you find "offensive" is not a good thing... It is abhorant...

A recent article of yours claimed that the Nation States forum (set up by the author, Max Barry) was a recruiting ground for Neo Nazis. I am a Cree woman (indigenous Canadian), and a regular user of the Nation States General Forum. I have been a poster to that forum for over a year, and in that time, I have seen a wide range of discussions and opinions. Yes, there are occasionally racists and White Supremacists who post to this forum...but do you truly have such a low opinion of the intelligence of your fellow human beings that you would assume that racist rantings = assent by those that read them?

I have been a target of racism my whole life. And yet I would NEVER support a move to suppress the freedom of speech of these groups. I prefer to have these kinds of flawed beliefs out in the open, where they can be examined, challenged, refuted, and hopefully...discarded.

But this is truly not the focus of my complaint to you.

That you would represent the entire community of Nation States forumites as accomplices in a recruiting paradise for racists deeply offends me. The author's cursory 'investigation' is giving voice to a marginalised minority of posters/users. The author may have issues with the idea of freedom of speech...but that same freedom affords the author the right to make such spurious and uniformed claims. It also affords me, and others who frequent NS, the right to challenge these assumptions and request a more thorough and detailed look into what is, in my experience, one of the most diverse, and politically varied forums out there.

Challenge beliefs that you do not agree with. Challenge rhetoric. But do not take the methods of bigots and use them to your own ends...blatant generalisations, stereotypes, and misinformed politicking are the tools of the ignorant. Challenge your assumptions. Come visit us and let us show you who we are. Unless you prefer to create strawmen in your spare time.

You also fail to see the example I have given.

Like cheaters and hackers on computer games, some, like the attention - Good or bad. It strengthens their resolve (And now one has gone off to create his own forum >_>). You insulting them does not get rid of them as effectively as you think, as you can see, they're just dormant.

You also fail to see the example I have given.

Like cheaters and hackers on computer games, some, like the attention - Good or bad. It strengthens their resolve (And now one has gone off to create his own forum >_>). You insulting them does not get rid of them as effectively as you think, as you can see, they're just dormant.
Nope, not insulting. Demolishing their arguments. In public. For all to see.

Frankly, I found it very educational to read the neo-Nazis' attempts to defend their views on this site. I knew their views were illogical, but seeing exactly what logical errors they were making made it easier for me to debunk them.

The solution to hate speech is not to ban it, but to shine the harsh, unforgiving light of truth on it. It makes the haters crawl back under their rocks and hide.

:p
Occidio Multus and I both attempted a number of times to open a thread for White Supremacists to come and share their views with the rest of us. We made it clear in these threads that anti-racists were not welcome to debate. Why? Because as 'people of colour :rolleyes: ', we both want to understand the ideology that could justify in ANYONE's mind the hatred of people based on their colour or ethnicity. NOT ONE white supremacist was able to give us any sort of coherent ideological outline. Not one. If this were a recruiting ground, surely these kinds of beliefs would be more clearly laid out and available to all potential recruits, no?

From what I've seen, the white supremacists who come on board get little welcome, and remove themselves to other forums. The ones who stay have little understanding of their beliefs, or come to troll.

Advocating the rights of all people equally to express opinions and beliefs, includes anti-racists as much as racists, in our opinion of things.

We will not "ban" them, because doing such created the very precedent to deny and remove freedoms; including our OWN freedom to express our OWN opinions contrary to those.

While people argue that the "slippery slope" is not an argument; and it isn't societally; it is in matters of law; as soon as you develope a case against one form of "offensive speech" you open precedent to engage against any other form of offensive speech that can be thought of.

As soon as you advocate the removal of the right of someone to advocate, or express racist views; based upon them "offending" someone else: You open the gate to ban:
Capitalistic Views: since some find them offensive
Atheistic Views: since some find them offensive
Communistic Views: since some find them offensive
Socialistic Views: since some find them offensive
Naturalistic Views: since some find them offensive

and so on... People have a right to express their views; people have a right to express opinions against the expressed views of other; people, no where, have a fundamental right not to be offended by the expression of views of another.... They do have a right to speak against those views, however....

Banning acts which impose against the rights of another is a good thing...
Banning thought and speech that you find "offensive" is not a good thing... It is abhorant...


People have stated: Trying to get rid of them will make it worse (Though as I said, insulting them will make them more "Hardline" also). This is on an internet forum. Ban them, and they're gone.

On countless forums, in many countries, there are laws and rules against racism. They work perfectly. Even better on forums, because it's easily a case of banning the IP, they're gone. In countries, as I said, there are laws in many countries, that do the job, they can do it better, but it is better than nothing. - I am not going to argue that, because it is a fact.

I find no other speech to be offensive, so stop referring to "Other thoughts and speech" etc... I respect the views of Atheists, Theists, Capitalists, Socialists, Communists and Democrats - NOT the views of those that discriminate, and favour racial hatred.

Political hatred, I see the whole thing as rather stupid, but there it doesn't matter. Unless it's going as far to call someone a Nazi, or Hitler.

Again: Only racism, not anything. For some reason, all of you have a hard time comprehending this. Why? I have no damn idea.

Racism is completely different to findind Capitalism, or Atheism offensive (Infact finding Atheism offensive would be part of Racism).

Occidio Multus and I both attempted a number of times to open a thread for White Supremacists to come and share their views with the rest of us. We made it clear in these threads that anti-racists were not welcome to debate. Why? Because as 'people of colour :rolleyes: ', we both want to understand the ideology that could justify in ANYONE's mind the hatred of people based on their colour or ethnicity. NOT ONE white supremacist was able to give us any sort of coherent ideological outline. Not one.
interesting that... reminds me of some lyrics from my (one of my) favourite band(s)

"You say there's no black in the
Union Jack, but
You can't give me a single reason why."


i love Pitchshifter

Nope, not insulting. Demolishing their arguments. In public. For all to see.


For all to see? That's not really a factor. When anyone debates anything on the internet, everyone can see, and someone will lose. If I ever lose, I don't feel any worse no matter how many people read it. Take politicians as an example, they have to go into Parliament, and debate their side, it can be broadcasted on TV - Does that bother them? In most cases - No.

If you demolish a persons argument, if their blindly ignorant, they won't care.
Take Islamic Extremists - They ignore their religious leaders, and listen to their extremist cult leaders. Do they care if they lose an argument? No.

actually, i read it as another example of the general battle to get third parties to refuse to provide cheap or free spaces for nazi to recruit and organize in order to have people like myself and the author of the article killed. this is typically done whenever nazi bands organize shows at some bar or whatever - the owner of the bar is called by a number of anti-fascists, informed that they are allowing nazis a platform to organize and recruit from, and that their will be noisy protests outside if they allow the show to go on.
Yes, but unlike your example, we, the regulars of said bar, can do that job ourselves, quite well thank you very much. When have you ever seen a racist get wide acclaim here? Or spew forth hatred for any noticeable period of time? We don't need to call in the thought police to get rid of these idiots. You challenge their rhetoric and *poof*. They run away. I greatly resent the inference (made in the article) that the rest of us are silent accomplices to racism.

same deal here, though the author does show a shallow understanding of the workings of, for example, the general forum. but he is right that nazis are using this site to recruit. they've said so on racistidiotfront before (any time there has been a nazi influx on the forum it's been linked back to the stormies). they've gone rather quiet in recent months as far as general is concerned - it must be tough to be constantly ridiculed and shown to be idiots by a large population of people who know better, especially when you can't find enough pictures to plausibly make up some bullshit about being another hot nazi chick. but i do not doubt that they are using less transparent methods or recruiting, such as the tg system, to get dumb kids involved in the fucktard movement proper. And how is this different than using MSN or any other method of communication? You want to start charging them? Monitoring them perhaps? When you KNOW how 'dangerous' things like socialism, communism, *whatever*-ism is in the minds of others? When the same justification for banning these idiots has been given for people who think like you and me?

When they step out of line, squash them. But you start supporting this idea of making certain thoughts illegal, and I get nervous.

free speech is fine - better to have the fuckers out in the open to be laughed at (and beat up the instant they try anything). but i can see the angle against allowing them to use someone else's resources and money to organize and recruit. especially if they are doing it quietly.Maybe it's something that we need to look into more. Granted. I don't think we take these groups as seriously as some of them warrant. But the suggestions that have been made so far are, in my mind, a cure worse than the disease. There needs to be another way...something other than monitoring private conversations and so on.

You also fail to see the example I have given.

Like cheaters and hackers on computer games, some, like the attention - Good or bad. It strengthens their resolve (And now one has gone off to create his own forum >_>). You insulting them does not get rid of them as effectively as you think, as you can see, they're just dormant.
Could you please indicate who you are speaking to (unless you intend us to assume you are addressing us all) by quoting the post you are replying to? Thank you.

People have stated: Trying to get rid of them will make it worse (Though as I said, insulting them will make them more "Hardline" also). This is on an internet forum. Ban them, and they're gone.

Oh, it's so simple. You'd know, because you're a game moderator on this website and so you have firsthand knowledge of how easy it is to police tens of thousands of accounts. Oh wait you don't.


I find no other speech to be offensive, so stop referring to "Other thoughts and speech" etc... I respect the views of Atheists, Theists, Capitalists, Socialists, Communists and Democrats - NOT the views of those that discriminate, and favour racial hatred.

That's nice. Unfortunately for us all, your personal prejudices and biases are not the basis of this website's policy. What you respect or consider offensive is largely irrelevant.


Again: Only racism, not anything. For some reason, all of you have a hard time comprehending this. Why? I have no damn idea.

No, I can comprehend pretty easily that you have a problem with racism and not with, for example, promoting global violent communist revolution. Trouble is you can't comprehend that some of us, like me, don't give a shit.

Racism is completely different to findind Capitalism, or Atheism offensive (Infact finding Atheism offensive would be part of Racism).

What? Atheism isn't a race. Finding atheism offensive is not in any way racist. I'm an atheist, and someone prejudiced against me or my beliefs is not racist. What a bunch of nonsense.

NOT ONE white supremacist was able to give us any sort of coherent ideological outline. Not one. If this were a recruiting ground, surely these kinds of beliefs would be more clearly laid out and available to all potential recruits, no?

not really. nazis aren't known for their coherent thought and it rationality never been one of their main recruiting tactics. they prefer emotional appeals to people's ingonrance and weakness.

From what I've seen, the white supremacists who come on board get little welcome, and remove themselves to other forums. The ones who stay have little understanding of their beliefs, or come to troll.

which is why i personally would rather have them out in the open here on the general forum. i am concerned about tg recruiting and the like though, as we have very little way to track what's happening on that end. and honestly, there have been organized fash recruiting efforts on here - some of them were even somewhat effective. especially when they invented a hot female nazi, created specifically to appeal to stupid teenage boys.

Oh, it's so simple. You'd know, because you're a game moderator on this website and so you have firsthand knowledge of how easy it is to police tens of thousands of accounts. Oh wait you don't.



That's nice. Unfortunately for us all, your personal prejudices and biases are not the basis of this website's policy. What you respect or consider offensive is largely irrelevant.



No, I can comprehend pretty easily that you have a problem with racism and not with, for example, promoting global violent communist revolution. Trouble is you can't comprehend that some of us, like me, don't give a shit.



What? Atheism isn't a race. Finding atheism offensive is not in any way racist. I'm an atheist, and someone prejudiced against me or my beliefs is not racist. What a bunch of nonsense.


I was grouping religious (Or lack thereof) hatred in with that.
What a bunch of nonsense? Well SOMEONE's being ignorant today.

Policing a forum? No. But I've been on many forums. The moderators monitor as much as they can (Not asking them to be omnipotent), and then where they can't, but normal users can, the normal users report the posts/people.

Personal prejudices against racists... Now there's irony for you.
You cannot be prejudicial against a racist. They're racist and that's it, as said before, those that posted in the thread have no basis for their arguments.

Communist revolution? Yes, if that was a problem, I would care.
If you do not give a shite, then why post here?

So stop with your ignorant, cynical and sarcastic remarks, they are traits of bad debating, and can discredit your argument.

When have you ever seen a racist get wide acclaim here? Or spew forth hatred for any noticeable period of time?

parratoga. though she/he (i still don't buy the 'hot female nazi' thing) kept her/his rhetoric under control enough to not get instantly deleted.

parratoga. though she/he (i still don't buy the 'hot female nazi' thing) kept her/his rhetoric under control enough to not get instantly deleted.

Kept the place entertaining tho

I was grouping religious (Or lack thereof) hatred in with that.

Oh, well religious hatred and racial hatred are different things, so that was your error.

What a bunch of nonsense? Well SOMEONE's being ignorant today.

Yes... SOMEONE is.

Policing a forum? No. But I've been on many forums. The moderators monitor as much as they can (Not asking them to be omnipotent), and then where they can't, but normal users can, the normal users report the posts/people.

A forum? This is a website. The problem as described by others is not forum recruiting, but apparently telegram recruiting in-game. Guess what, I can't report a telegram I've never received, and neither can "normal users" (whatever they are). So your method of self-policing wouldn't work.


You cannot be prejudicial against a racist. They're racist and that's it, as said before, those that posted in the thread have no basis for their arguments.

Where are you getting these rules? You seem to be hoping I'll just say, "Oh yes, I forgot it's impossible to have a prejudice when faced with someone who is racist." Well I won't, and you'll have to do better than pulling these statements out of your ass to convince anyone.

Communist revolution? Yes, if that was a problem, I would care.

I don't think you would. But whatever.

If you do not give a shite, then why post here?

I don't give a shit about your opinion. Neither do the people who run this site. This isn't a democracy or a representative democracy. However, my being apathetic to your prejudices doesn't preclude me from posting anywhere. That's another rule you've issued that makes no sense.

So stop with your ignorant, cynical and sarcastic remarks, they are traits of bad debating, and can discredit your argument.

Cynical and sarcastic? Yes. Ignorant? No. Ad hominem arguments can discredit your argument too, you know, so maybe you'd like to correct where I am so "ignorant" instead of just making another bald assertion that has no basis in reality.

Kept the place entertaining tho

i forget, what was the controversy around her leaving ns? i remember there being a bunch of threads about it, started by the fan boys.

parratoga. though she/he (i still don't buy the 'hot female nazi' thing) kept her/his rhetoric under control enough to not get instantly deleted.
And that's all I ask.

The underlying belief behind all this 'fear of the freedom to recruit' by racist groups is that people are weak, and will be 'converted'. And really, I think we're talking about kids and teens, because we generally don't worry too much about adults. So in essence, we're worried that young people are going to get sucked in by these beliefs, right?

Kids are being exposed to so many opinions, beliefs and worldviews in the 'information age', that aside from locking them up in their rooms sans music, sans computer, sans tv or any other form of modern entertainment, we need to just accept that exposure is inevitable.

That doesn't mean we let them at it, willy nilly. And General doesn't. We monitor. Not just the mods, ALL of us. We monitor, we offer different viewpoints, we challenge, we discuss, we refute. And the poor, helpless 'kids' on here get to see that contradictory opinions exist.

So say these racists are organising through TGs, and regions. Frankly, I'd rather have them do it here, where they are more likely to visit General, and see other beliefs espoused, than do this sort of thing on a racist forum, where only one version of the truth is presented.

i forget, what was the controversy around her leaving ns? i remember there being a bunch of threads about it, started by the fan boys.

Suicidal. In love with Germanica. Messed around by Germanica. Fed up of the Mods here. Spending more time on other boards. Dead.

I believe they were all touted as theories so take your pick.

Oh, well religious hatred and racial hatred are different things, so that was your error.



Yes... SOMEONE is.



A forum? This is a website. The problem as described by others is not forum recruiting, but apparently telegram recruiting in-game. Guess what, I can't report a telegram I've never received, and neither can "normal users" (whatever they are). So your method of self-policing wouldn't work.



Where are you getting these rules? You seem to be hoping I'll just say, "Oh yes, I forgot it's impossible to have a prejudice when faced with someone who is racist." Well I won't, and you'll have to do better than pulling these statements out of your ass to convince anyone.



I don't think you would. But whatever.



I don't give a shit about your opinion. Neither do the people who run this site. This isn't a democracy or a representative democracy. However, my being apathetic to your prejudices doesn't preclude me from posting anywhere. That's another rule you've issued that makes no sense.



Cynical and sarcastic? Yes. Ignorant? No. Ad hominem arguments can discredit your argument too, you know, so maybe you'd like to correct where I am so "ignorant" instead of just making another bald assertion that has no basis in reality.


If you failed to see the obvious way that I used it (I.e. sticking religious hatred in there with it), then you're either ignorant, as I stated, or very unintelligent. Take your pick.

That method of "Self policing", as I said, is on every forum I wasn't commenting on... Whatever it was you were.

Where are you getting these rules? You seem to be hoping I'll just say, "Oh yes, I forgot it's impossible to have a prejudice when faced with someone who is racist." Well I won't, and you'll have to do better than pulling these statements out of your ass to convince anyone.

As I said: Irony. Being prejudicial against a racist. Again: Either ignorant or unintelligent.

Enough with this Communist Revolution shite.

Rule? Wow, I'm not going to say that a third time.
It was a suggestion. Why bother posting in something you care little about. Random E.g. Topic: "Cheese is black, not yellow." - If you do not care, why post? Is there any point?

As for Ad Hominem, you posting something cynical, sarcastic and, yes it is, ignorant (Or, if you want, unintelligent.) can be considered so.

Edit: Well, unfortunatly, work must drag me away. Been entertaining though.

Lot's to say -- so little time :p

First off, thanks to Sdaeriji for finding the article and for starting this thread. Once again, this thread, like so many others in this game, proves the magic and appeal of this game created by Max Barry :)

Here's the link in Moderation Forum about Max Barry's [violet] recent clarification regarding what is permissible on national flags, mottos and names of nations:

Acceptable Flag Policy (or: Swastikas, Boobies, and Sickles, oh my!)
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=438053

Per a few comments made in this thread, and referenced in the above mentioned one, flags, national names and mottos are customizable and cannot be altered by other players' comments. Hence they are qualitatively different then what one posts in a forum thread like this one. I agree fully with this policy and clarification. As Max notes in the Acceptable Flag Policy thread:

Apparently there's some confusion over our policy on acceptable images for flags (the kind you upload yourself). In particular, there's a mistaken belief that any image is fine so long as it doesn't include a swastika or nudity.

Nope! As per the FAQ, flags are subject to the same minimum standard as any other content: they can't be obscene, illegal, threatening, malicious, defamatory, spam, or have the primary aim of offending or upsetting people. And:

http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/target=faq][/url]

Does that apply to my nation's flag?
You betcha. In fact, we're much stricter on nation flags than we are on forum posts, because they're not open for challenge and debate. If you want to make a political point, don't use your flag -- use the forum, where other people have a right of reply.

This has been the case from the beginning. However, I once answered a question about a three-pronged red and black flag by saying something like, "Only swastikas and swastika-like images are banned, not anything else," and the "anything else" was taken more literally than I intended. I apologize, particularly to the mods, for this confusion, and I'm sorry if it's lead to some inconsistent moderation...

(I)t's a simple principle. If a flag celebrates death, slavery, violence, or other not-nice things against real people, that's malicious, and will have the primary effect of offending...

And because I know this is going to come up again: I realize that you can point out a bunch of different groups that committed terrible acts, and yet we're not banning their flags. That's because we're not banning the symbols of every group that scored a particular body count; we're prohibiting content that is malicious in nature and to most people will have the primary effect of offending. Not a few people, not just you, but most people. That's the criteria.

The forums permit relatively free speech on a range of issues, so, as the FAQ says, if you've got a political ax to grind, do it here, where people can argue back. Please don't put it in your flag when you know it will piss people off.

Above quotes length has been edited for brevity by this poster. Missing sections (which can be viewed fully in the Acceptable Flag Policy link) are noted by (...)

I certainly concur with Irish Empire's comments in general about fighting nazis.
Yet I also in general with regards to the forums (both Regional Message Boards and the Forums) with Adaeriji's comments insofar as free speech is paramount, so long as one is conscious about not giving grief to people with a simple exclaimation like "Jews are scum" or "Jews should be killed" -- both exclaimations are offensive and should face moderator scrutiny. Arguing/discussion about the merits of Nazism, fascism, Stalinism, etc., to me is wholly different (and I believe is upheld within NationStates).

Originally when I first began to play this game, I held fast to the view that such expressions like nazism should not have a forum on NationStates (versus roleplaying in an appropriate forum -- can one reasonably not tell the difference?). Yet Max Barry's challenge to us (in a general sense, for I have never directly and knowingly corresponded with him on this matter) was for us to challenge the merits of any expressions we don't agree with within NationStates. I for one am happy he pushed us to uphold free speech.

I find it curious that professed nazis are not on these forums more than they are. Yet because of game mechanics (and indeed, I believe they're making the most of them) I have viewed professed nazis actively recruiting by creating regions with links to offsite forums with nazi and fascist names, much as was referenced in the article linked at the beginning of this thread. Actually those cited in the article are not nearly as offensive (nor impermissible, by NS rules, as I understand them) as some other announced links -- which by the way the Moderators have quickly removed their advertised posts and have warned players that their nations will face deletion if such offsite websites -- being in violation of the Terms of Service for this free yet private game -- are posted again (see the reference to this as of this writing still posted on the regional message board of Union of Progressive Socialism).

One way in which some of us who play NS have successfully challenged nazism off the forums has been to refound their regions (75 at last count) and turn the refounds into museums and memorials against hatred. A full list of the ones made by The Anti Nazi Alliance is on the RMB of the region by the same name. The MT Army region also has refounded even more -- see its WFE for the list of them. Our refounds have been exclusively created when professed nazi/fascist/white supremacists; or griefers (the latter are apart from the former in real life, yet their gameplay merits our defense arm Pacific Defenders to refound their regions, when the opportunity arises ;) break NS rules and their founders become deleted; and any remaining regions abandon such founderless regions voluntarily. We in The Anti Nazi Alliance try to make a copy of the regions being devoid of nations. Then when they actually cease to exist, we refound them as museums against hatred and inhumanity, and post the copied prior histories of them in each of the region's RMBs.

We refound these regions not to spite the nazis, but to give witness that there have been real life events in human history where such movements have attacked and indeed (mass) murdered other people because those killed held an orientation, gender, race, religion or ethinicity that was different.

Once again thanks for the thread, Sdaeriji. How to uphold our ideals of freedom of speech while being affirming of humanity and our differences remains a daily challenge.

The Paradoxical Summer Paradise of Nolaerie
Pacific Defenders
The Anti Nazi Alliance
ANA / KT History Museums
Museum Creation Division

Actually, if you think that of Mussolini, then you must have failed history, my most promenant subject. He was loved until the '30s, when his economic reforms started to fail, and he was influenced by Hitler to bring in racist laws.
He has been ranked, in a recent poll, the 35th greatest Italian. If that's not being loved, then I wonder what's the point in a poll for the "100 Greatest Italians" is for, if No.35 is void.

To say that he was completely void of racist views is stupid. Every leader at that time was racist. I mean, Churchill was one of the worst for that.

fine for the racism-related stuff but no, in my opinion "a dictator loved by its people" can make as much sense as "dry water". mussolini showed the nation he had the power to reduce to silence his most ferocious opponents (giacomo matteotti, for example), thus he gained the silent consent of the nation. and his militians did the rest, scaring the populace. this can raise feelings of fear, not love, it's so deeply different.
I mean, we're talking about a tyrant who spoke to the people using the very words they wanted to hear, but having no idea of how to achieve his goals. he was a huge gambler, a bluffer with the opportunity to take a lot of risks, 'til he had well protected shoulders.
italians didn't have a choice, it was a matter of supporting him (in a very fierce way or mild, it didn't matter) or slowly becoming an outcast in the fascist society.

and I'll tell you my opinion about that poll too. if I'm to tell the popularity of such a person, I would judge that by his death, when is SUCH a death, and not by a ranking in a poll. some people simply forget!

If you failed to see the obvious way that I used it (I.e. sticking religious hatred in there with it), then you're either ignorant, as I stated, or very unintelligent. Take your pick.

And you, the bastion of supression of speech, are treading upon the limits of acceptability for this forum. Tone down your personal attacks. See, this is moderation. Posters report unacceptable posts, and moderators decide whether the compaint has merit...do you like this system so far? We do.

You don't "combat" racism by squelching it and hiding your head in the sand and patting yourself on the back for getting rid of it. You fight racism by using your right of Freedom of Speech to speak out against it. If you hear someone make an ethnic joke, don't laugh. Tell them you find it offensive. If someone uses the word "gay" to mean "stupid," call them on it. I've been known to start arguments when someone says, "that's so gay."

If you believe in the First Amendment, it also gives you the right not to associate with those whose opinions differ from your own. So turn off Ann Coulter. Don't buy her book. Draw devil horns and a moustache on her likeness if you wish. But don't squelch her right to make herself look like the idiot she is.

You sound like a friend of mine, he finds no racist jokes funny ever, yet strangly enough he finds jokes about throwing babies into blenders highly amusing, if the choice is between rascist jokes and killing babies to laugh I choose the first one.

I really hate it when threads like these turn into fights between people that are all clearly against Nazis... :(

If you failed to see the obvious way that I used it (I.e. sticking religious hatred in there with it), then you're either ignorant, as I stated, or very unintelligent. Take your pick.

Yes, it was obvious you want to broaden the term "racism" to include whatever you dislike, like religious hatred or even "being offended by atheists."

THAT is ignorant. You can stop with trying to dismiss me as an idiot, k thx bye.

That method of "Self policing", as I said, is on every forum I wasn't commenting on... Whatever it was you were.

I was commenting on the game "Nationstates" as described in the original post. I thought that was what we were talking about here. If you're talking about policing jolt's forums only, fine.


As I said: Irony. Being prejudicial against a racist. Again: Either ignorant or unintelligent.

prej·u·dice Pronunciation Key (prj-ds)
n.

1.
1. An adverse judgment or opinion formed beforehand or without knowledge or examination of the facts.
2. A preconceived preference or idea.


So you are saying what? No one can have an adverse opinion about a "racist" based on less than all the facts?

You're the one trying to tell me atheist-hating is racial prejudice but you also claim it's impossible to be prejudiced against a racist! Wow, so if a Nazi hates a non-racist based on race, it's prejudice, but if a Nazi hates a racist based on race, it's not? Amazingly fluid working definition you seem to have.


Rule? Wow, I'm not going to say that a third time.
It was a suggestion. Why bother posting in something you care little about. Random E.g. Topic: "Cheese is black, not yellow." - If you do not care, why post? Is there any point?

Is there any point to anything? If you DO care, why post? What's the point? Why does "care" make something have a "point?" That sounds like another 'rule' you're making up, you know kinda like "its not prejudice to prejudge a racist" or "offense towards atheism is racism."

As for Ad Hominem, you posting something cynical, sarcastic and, yes it is, ignorant (Or, if you want, unintelligent.) can be considered so.

You've done NOTHING to show in what way anything I've said is ignorant. You've just repeated yourself a bunch of times, apparently in the hope that repetition strengthens your weak-ass ad hominem attempts.

Edit: Well, unfortunatly, work must drag me away. Been entertaining though.

Yeah, come back when you've got a real argument other than "ur stupid."
kthxbye.

that article is bs because:

1) the thread called "Jews oppressing mentally ill" was a joke thread about "space Jews"

2) freedom of speech

3) people don't have to put there ideals into a nation just look at mine

4) I don't think any of the groups mentioned could find recruits here because the average NS'er is a smart person (even though im surprised Darwin hasn't killed us off) who thinks about it from the other side

I would like just 1 day were there are no rules just to see what happens (I predict nothing because people will just ignore nutcases)

And you, the bastion of supression of speech, are treading upon the limits of acceptability for this forum. Tone down your personal attacks. See, this is moderation. Posters report unacceptable posts, and moderators decide whether the compaint has merit...do you like this system so far? We do.


Maybe as I stated that's how it works on every forum.

And, faced with blatently cynical, sarcastic and possibly (On purpose) ignorant comments, I may get a little annoyed. Never has been a problem before, but it doesn't bother me, as you said, up to moderators and administrators to find out why it was posted, and if it deserves punishment/warnings.

And yet again: Supression of Speech? No. Supression of Racism - Yes. For once, get that right.

And, yes, I do agree, Laerod. We all have anti racist views, yet none of us can agree.

Ughhhhh. Morons. I should link this thread in the comments.

And yet again: Supression of Speech? No. Supression of Racism - Yes. For once, get that right.


No...you get it right. You can not suppress the thoughts of others, which are how their beliefs are articulated internally. You can no more supress racism than you can supress the belief that cheese is superior to tomatoes. (sorry Laerod, both touchy subjects for you, I know:)). You can ONLY supress the verbal expression of these ideas, thoughts, beliefs.

And your attitude is as grating, overbearing, and arrogant as any you've labelled with the same. So pot, before you start yelling at kettle, realise you're both black.

And, yes, I do agree, Laerod. We all have anti racist views, yet none of us can agree.The day we fight about those disagreements instead of dealing with them in a civil manner is a victory for them...

Suicidal. In love with Germanica. Messed around by Germanica. Fed up of the Mods here. Spending more time on other boards. Dead.

I believe they were all touted as theories so take your pick.

Parratoga is actually still around, though she hasn't posted on the forum since I returned to NS.

While I was never one of her fans, I must note that she was the only one of the old forum Nazis ever to discuss anything besides Nazism. Most of the NS Nazis were depressingly one-dimensional; they seemed to have no beliefs and no identities outside of Nazism. Which may be the root of their problems, now that I think about it.

Ughhhhh. Morons. I should link this thread in the comments.
I think you should. I keep reading the new comments posted in response to this article, and I shake my head. Do people really just consume whatever tripe passes through their lives calling itself 'news'? Indymedia or mainstream, no one should be simply accepting whatever they are told as inherently true. If these people really have issue with Nation States, I'd like them to join us and see for themselves, rather than believing 'TEH NAZIS ARE IN CONTROL!!!' :rolleyes:

Oh no! People with similar views get together on an internet forum :eek:

*shocked*

I think you should. I keep reading the new comments posted in response to this article, and I shake my head. Do people really just consume whatever tripe passes through their lives calling itself 'news'? Indymedia or mainstream, no one should be simply accepting whatever they are told as inherently true. If these people really have issue with Nation States, I'd like them to join us and see for themselves, rather than believing 'TEH NAZIS ARE IN CONTROL!!!' :rolleyes:

Heh. OK then. I see you already posted there. :)

Oh no! People with similar views get together on an internet forum :eek:

*shocked*
Even more shocking...people with DIFFERENT viewpoints get together on an internet forum!

Even more shocking...people with DIFFERENT viewpoints get together on an internet forum!


oh my god look!! I can walk!!!! I can walk!!!!

If these people really have issue with Nation States, I'd like them to join us and see for themselves, rather than believing 'TEH NAZIS ARE IN CONTROL!!!' :rolleyes:I find it ironic that this article seems to be from roughly the same time that [violet] reaffirmed the ban on Nazi-symbols on flags...

No...you get it right. You can not suppress the thoughts of others, which are how their beliefs are articulated internally. You can no more supress racism than you can supress the belief that cheese is superior to tomatoes. (sorry Laerod, both touchy subjects for you, I know:)). You can ONLY supress the verbal expression of these ideas, thoughts, beliefs.

And your attitude is as grating, overbearing, and arrogant as any you've labelled with the same. So pot, before you start yelling at kettle, realise you're both black.


Here we go again.

What I am for is Supression of Racism, not total supression of Freedom of Speech, why? Because in every country, except the "good ol'" US of A, there are anti racist laws. So stop attacking me for that, maybe now you'll realise why I'm getting annoyed.

I never said: "g0m nazis r in t3h p0wders!1!". Not once.

I'm saying, in general, racism is something we can inherantly do without.

But no, you've ignored what I've said, and taken it to mean WXZ instead of XYZ.

its especially stupid when they could be speaking out against actual nazi recruiting grounds and discussion forums, like this one http://www.nazi.org/community/forum/ :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

I was accused of being a Nazi by the principle of my school once because I brought in a picture of my nation, which they found to be distasteful. They wanted to suspend my friends and I but they ended up relying on the most irrelevant details to prove I was a Nazi. Since I named my country after a GERMAN cookie, I must be a Nazi. The principles also disregarded the fact that I have Jewish cousins, even though I told them many times. I hate Nazis, but they have their right to freedom of speech. Perhaps by just ignoring them we could actually fight them. I mean, they probably like the attention they are getting, it's a chance to "fight for their cause". Not only that but I bet some of the people who start these Nazi nations aren't even Nazis, they probably just did it for a joke. They probably aren't serious about it...chill out people.

its especially stupid when they could be speaking out against actual nazi recruiting grounds and discussion forums, like this one http://www.nazi.org/community/forum/ :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Forum raiding party! *grabs axe*

:p

*sigh* the time old debate over wether free speech laws protect idiots such as nazis (OMG FLAMING). The fact is, people can think or so whatever they want- it's their right as human beings to do so. You just have to grin and bear it, no matter how ill conceived or stupid it is.

Forum raiding party! *grabs axe*

:p
w00t lets go! :D

*dons nazi-bashing helmet*

This is actually the first thread on these forums I've seen about Nazis. I wouldn't say the game is over run with them, and they're trying to recruit everyone. :P

That being said, I am against Nazism. Anyone who wants to harm others simply because they're a "different/inferior race" is sick. I wouldn't be against them having their freedom of speech revoked. In progressive society, there should be no room for that sort of thing. We're all human. I, for one, like the fact that espousing such ideals is illegal in Germany.

I was accused of being a Nazi by the principle of my school once because I brought in a picture of my nation, which they found to be distasteful. They wanted to suspend my friends and I but they ended up relying on the most irrelevant details to prove I was a Nazi. Since I named my country after a GERMAN cookie, I must be a Nazi. The principles also disregarded the fact that I have Jewish cousins, even though I told them many times. I hate Nazis, but they have their right to freedom of speech. Perhaps by just ignoring them we could actually fight them. I mean, they probably like the attention they are getting, it's a chance to "fight for their cause". Not only that but I bet some of the people who start these Nazi nations aren't even Nazis, they probably just did it for a joke. They probably aren't serious about it...chill out people.

True. A LOT of NS is filled with people who are (even if they don't admit it ;) ) essentially role-playing the leaders of fictious countries. Not all "nazi" nations are owned by nazis, not all "communist" nations by commies, not all "anarchies" by anarchists and not all "inoffensive centrist democracies" by inoffensive centrist democrats.

That's something a lot of people don't get when they first see NS.

And yet again: Supression of Speech? No. Supression of Racism - Yes. For once, get that right.


No. Racism is as valid a belief as any other, and this community is based around discussion of beliefs. It is not a popular belief, historically it has not been a successful belief, and I stress that it is not one of my personal beliefs. But for some people it is a genuine foundation on which they believe culture should be built. For other people, that belief may be that there's a God and that we should follow the Bible to the letter. For others it may be that every Tuesday should be bowling night.

In an open forum, in an open game, people must be allowed to voice their beliefs, however unpopular, without fear of being censored.

What I am for is Supression of Racism, not total supression of Freedom of Speech...Then BY DEFINITION, you are not for Freedom of Speech. By suppressing racism, you are suppressing speech by preventing others from expressing their views.

If this is something your country espouses, your country is not truly free.

w00t lets go! :D

*dons nazi-bashing helmet*

I used to post on a far-right forum (there were leftists and anarchists there, too)...I actually recognise one of the posters on that Nazi forum. Scary.

As distasteful as National Socialism may be, they are still entitled to express their opinions

Exactly. Two wrongs don't make a right and denying them free speech for their political views is itself a step toward fascist thinking. Why not let these fascists take advantage of the very rights they condemn?

I don't really see what the problem is. Who cares if a bunch of Neo-nazi Skinheads have their own nations here? I certainly don't. Aside from that, it gives the FEDs a place to start tracking them and getting their IPs.

I do remember though there was this one "Aryan association" that was busted for having explosives and FA rifles some time ago. I'll have to go dig that up.

I used to post on a far-right forum (there were leftists and anarchists there, too)...I actually recognise one of the posters on that Nazi forum. Scary.
dude that whole site is scary! :eek:
read some thread arbitarily talking about how races should be segregated - into cities, counties, countries... etc... :headbang: :headbang:


but you used to post on a far-right forum :confused:

I used to post on a far-right forum (there were leftists and anarchists there, too)...I actually recognise one of the posters on that Nazi forum. Scary.

Weird, I actually worked with a guy who was a skinhead. Got along with him fine as we didn't bring up race or political issues....

Although I must say my skin was too dark for him to be comfortable ;)

If this is something your country espouses, your country is not truly free.Actually, no country's allow for total freedom of speech. Every country has some kind of legislation against libel or slander, at least. Every country has legislation against insulting behavior, some countries include displaying certain symbols and phrases as covered by that.

dude that whole site is scary! :eek:
read some thread arbitarily talking about how races should be segregated - into cities, counties, countries... etc... :headbang: :headbang:


but you used to post on a far-right forum :confused:

What's wrong with that? Nothing. I post on a Hard-core Gun board that is adamant about the 2nd amendment and upholding the constitution, does that make me a militia nut? Nope, just means I know more that I would without.

dude that whole site is scary! :eek:
read some thread arbitarily talking about how races should be segregated - into cities, counties, countries... etc... :headbang: :headbang:


but you used to post on a far-right forum :confused:

Yeah. It was actually labelled as an anarchist forum, but it was run by an anarchist who was also very racist. I didn't know that at the time, and when I found out, I just kept posting there. There were some pretty cool people on it though, like I said, there were some leftists there. One was a Mexican.

every time a nazi or a white supremacist posts in the general forum they are evicerated. they are shown to be fools who have no understanding of history, genetics, biology, economics, sociology or politics. they get so beat up by the rest of the NS population that they seldom last more than a few days. (khata being one of the few diehards who had to be banned by the mods)

i think they do the population of NS a great benefit. many of us are very young and not used to the kind of arguments presented by nazis. we know they are wrong but its hard to make a coherent post as to WHY they are wrong without some practice. these guys give us practice. a couple go-rounds on general and any of our teens could smash a whitesupremacist in a debate. that makes it well worth allowing them on here, in my opinion.

i think they do the population of NS a great benefit. many of us are very young and not used to the kind of arguments presented by nazis. we know they are wrong but its hard to make a coherent post as to WHY they are wrong without some practice. these guys give us practice. a couple go-rounds on general and any of our teens could smash a whitesupremacist in a debate. that makes it well worth allowing them on here, in my opinion.

I totally agree. :)

Then BY DEFINITION, you are not for Freedom of Speech. By suppressing racism, you are suppressing speech by preventing others from expressing their views.

If this is something your country espouses, your country is not truly free.did you can shot
whoever you want in your countrey? rob a bank? break the laws? do everything you want?
no? than [b]your country is not truly free.

the last thing every reasonable will want is live in truly free country. sometimes the freedom or the privacy may harm other rights as the right to life and security, and there is some cases, which harming freedom and privacy is acceptable.
some think (as myself) that limit the free speach of nazis is one of those cases.

People have stated: Trying to get rid of them will make it worse (Though as I said, insulting them will make them more "Hardline" also). This is on an internet forum. Ban them, and they're gone.

On countless forums, in many countries, there are laws and rules against racism. They work perfectly. Even better on forums, because it's easily a case of banning the IP, they're gone. In countries, as I said, there are laws in many countries, that do the job, they can do it better, but it is better than nothing. - I am not going to argue that, because it is a fact.

I find no other speech to be offensive, so stop referring to "Other thoughts and speech" etc... I respect the views of Atheists, Theists, Capitalists, Socialists, Communists and Democrats - NOT the views of those that discriminate, and favour racial hatred.

Political hatred, I see the whole thing as rather stupid, but there it doesn't matter. Unless it's going as far to call someone a Nazi, or Hitler.

Again: Only racism, not anything. For some reason, all of you have a hard time comprehending this. Why? I have no damn idea.

Racism is completely different to findind Capitalism, or Atheism offensive (Infact finding Atheism offensive would be part of Racism).

It does not matter what you find offensive or not: its the principle of creating the PRECEDENT to ban ideas and thought because it "offensive".

We do not "Ban" them, because we would not "Ban" others for expressing ideas. ACTING on those ideas is a different thing. Expressing them is allowed..

You cannot "ban" one chain of thought, and think that you can protect all others. The same laws created to ban one, can be applied elsewhere. This is where the precedent is set. And it is this precedent that we fight again, because we KNOW the future damage it causes to the freedom of ideas... Which we want open, for people to interact.

Yes, it would be easy to "ban" such on this forum, but we won't, because this forum is about people expressing their ideas to one another. Acting on those ideas will get you in trouble; if they harm another. (Being offended is not a harm....)

We have no problem comprehending the concept... Banning a thought is WRONG, and an act by what can only be labled as tyrany. We could care less what the tyrants in France, the UK, Germany, or even the US want to do in their crusade to opress people of one form or another.... We fight against this on ALL fronts, because that is what the duty of a Patriot is to do.... Defend the liberties of each and every person, equally.... not merely those who agree with us. You can make further claims all you like.... We know, for a fact, that you're wrong...

Max, unlike you, is not a Tyrant... And will not go about a mission of "thought control" like some petty child who is insecure about his own beliefs... He knows, his, and he known many of ours, can compete fairly in this open enviroment, where the exchange of ideas is not hindered. I will not either... If one wants to express openly racist views; then I will exercize my right to express openly my oposition to those views... There is no need to ban them, because banning a thought, even if offensive, is contradictory to open discusion.... I am not so unsecure to think I am not capable of defeating those ideas in open forum...

every time a nazi or a white supremacist posts in the general forum they are evicerated. they are shown to be fools who have no understanding of history, genetics, biology, economics, sociology or politics. they get so beat up by the rest of the NS population that they seldom last more than a few days. (khata being one of the few diehards who had to be banned by the mods)

i think they do the population of NS a great benefit. many of us are very young and not used to the kind of arguments presented by nazis. we know they are wrong but its hard to make a coherent post as to WHY they are wrong without some practice. these guys give us practice. a couple go-rounds on general and any of our teens could smash a whitesupremacist in a debate. that makes it well worth allowing them on here, in my opinion.Of course, I agree wholeheartedly. I prefer bashing nazis to bashing conservatives because conservatives tend to be nice people. I don't like the idea of letting them display certain symbols, though.

I might be a little behind the times, but has anyone else seen this (http://melbourne.indymedia.org/news/2005/08/94598_comment.php#94693) article decrying Max Barry and NationStates as a breeding ground for Nazis?



It seems that people are offended by Mr. Barry's insistence on a free exchange of ideas, because certain ideas offend them. As distasteful as National Socialism may be, they are still entitled to express their opinions. Mr. Barry has repeatedly stated he does not want to censor anyone's political beliefs, so long as they are stated civily. But for these people, this is not good enough. They want Nazis banned from this site because they do not believe they are entitled to free speech.

I hope I am not alone in my disgust for this attempt to censor distasteful opinions. If we always censored all opinions that are unpopular with a group of people, then no one would say anything. I am not sure how successful this e-mail camapaign of theirs has been (perhaps the moderators could be so kind as to find out), but I would like to start our own counter-e-mail campaign, telling them that we support Max Barry's tolerance of ALL opinions, good or bad, and that we do not appreciate an outside effort to tell us what is and isn't acceptable for us to read.

Here is their contact page (http://melbourne.indymedia.org/contact.php). The subject should be "Re: Neo-Nazis Using Kensington Author's Website to Organize". I am unable to find a way to contact the author himself, though if anyone finds a way, that would be great.

I hope I am not alone in this. Thank you. :)

And I don't get what the big deal is anyway. Nazi posters get chewed up and spit out whenever they start their rhetoric. :DHa! It looks like Czardas's parents are trying a more direct approach to keeping him off NS since haxxor DEATing him wasn't enough... :D

*edit* Oh Jeez... it's an "Indymedia" site. Those people have always been utter Leftist nutburgers - they are right up there with DU and Kos. Anywhere there might be a conservative/libertarian/non-wackjob-leftist opinion posted is obviously a tool of the VRWC/BushNazis. :rolleyes:

After visiting the site, it became obvious that the only editorial policy was about each nation's flag, which cannot contain "a swastika or nudity," although other common Nazi and White Power symbols are perfectly fine. Forums are even less moderated and frequent threads are being posted such as, "How Jews oppress the mentally ill."

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=437373&highlight=mentally

Anyone attempting to use that thread as an example of actual Nazi/White Power propaganda is either being deliberately deceitful or is severely lacking in basic comprehension skills.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=437373&highlight=mentally

Anyone attempting to use that thread as an example of actual Nazi/White Power propaganda is either being deliberately deceitful or is severely lacking in basic comprehension skills.Not necessarily. They might not have bothered to look further than the title. I'm amazed they're too stupid to know who Ernst Röhm was and make a connection. That's the only problem I had, and it wasn't really enough for me to consider reporting the thread...

*edit* Oh Jeez... it's an "Indymedia" site. Those people have always been utter Leftist nutburgers - they are right up there with DU and Kos. Anywhere there might be a conservative/libertarian/non-wackjob leftist opinion posted is obviously a tool of the VRWC/BushNazis. :rolleyes:

Yeah. I'm apparently under Max Barry's payola, according to one of them. Hahaha.

Not necessarily. They might not have bothered to look further than the title. I'm amazed they're too stupid to know who Ernst Röhm was and make a connection. That's the only problem I had, and it wasn't really enough for me to consider reporting the thread...

Adequate research, such as actually reading the first post of the thread, here comes under the heading of 'basic comprehension skills'.


EDIT: having said that do I share the writer's concerns that NS is being used by actual Nazis to organise? Yes. What have I done about this in the past? Reported tens of neo-nazi nations to the moderators for the slightest infringement, in the hope that they eventually get banned from the site as a result. Unfortunately for a while there most of the neo-nazi nations appeared to be following the rules of the site, but given the recent changes in what is or is not deemed an acceptable flag, we now have an opportunity to report hundreds of nations for breaking the rules. For some there will be a slap on the wrist, but for some this might be the last straw that gets them banned from here.

I am firmly against the idea that Nazis should have their rights restricted. If you don't like their views, you ought to combat their views with your own speech. Call me idealistic, but I believe that in general the truth is able to hold its own aganst lies. Once we start banning certain kinds of speech we really, really disagree with, where is the line drawn? Pretty soon you drop one or both of those "really"'s. Every person should have a right of expression and advocacy. In a way, if these views truly fail, it actually leads to greater legitimization of the status quo.

I'm not saying that popularity is truth. There are no objective garauntees that anyone of us is heading in the right direction. But I believe that the world is divided into two camps, and It is vital that everyone believes one of these two things (the reality is that most people are somewhere in the middle between the two camps):

1. There are no guarantees, and I may be just as wrong as they are.
2. I am right, and my truth will triumph.

Either way, it leads you to the same conclusion. If there is no way to know what truth is, why would you assert your authority over another person's truth, and over another person's expression of that truth? On the other hand, If you are truly right as you believe, won't the truth shine through and lead everyone else to a knowledge of that truth eventually? If now, what is the point of believing such a "truth" in the first place?

I'm not saying that people in either camp shouldn't work towards a certain goal. People in camp one still have their personal truths to work on, and people in the latter camp have no guarantee that a realization of an objective truth will happen in their lifetime. We all have the power of "hope" working for us, which is what drives us on in this insane world, but that hope should always be within the construct of tolerance, respect, and the golden rule.

Finally, I realize that Europe is in a really hard place with its long history of extreme racial prejudice. As such, I understand (even if I don't agree with) the laws they have concerning Nazis. I don't know how it stacks up against us holding some 300-some-odd prisioners without trial, which I also disagree with, but that's another thread. Let me just say that it's really easy for someone to throw a whole bunch of idealism into the face of someone who's in a bit of a crunch, but it may not be very realistic, or born from an incomplete understanding of the situation.

Adequate research, such as actually reading the first post of the thread, here comes under the heading of 'basic comprehension skills'.I know. Just from the name of the OP and the thread, I thought it was racist. But I have the habit of reading the first post before I take any action, since I've noticed people wouldn't necessarily choose names or titles I find offensive because they know it will offend me. They might just not be as sensitive to it as I am.
This kind of journalism reminds me of some hate articles my school got from a local newspaper... no base, but plenty of bias.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=437373&highlight=mentally

Anyone attempting to use that thread as an example of actual Nazi/White Power propaganda is either being deliberately deceitful or is severely lacking in basic comprehension skills.

just stated as much myself on the infoshop discussion of the article.

Yeah. It was actually labelled as an anarchist forum, but it was run by an anarchist who was also very racist. I didn't know that at the time, and when I found out, I just kept posting there. There were some pretty cool people on it though, like I said, there were some leftists there. One was a Mexican.
heh fair enough... the Mexican dude makes it ok ;)

What's wrong with that? Nothing. I post on a Hard-core Gun board that is adamant about the 2nd amendment and upholding the constitution, does that make me a militia nut? Nope, just means I know more that I would without.
no nothing wrong with that, i was just suprised Kanabia - a fellow anarho-communist - used to post on one is all. post where you like

Oi.

I've been dealing with this nuttiness since day one, along with the other Moderators. I've also tried bringing the argument to them that letting racists speak is generally a good thing because their arguments are self-defeating. Anti-racist censorship has not at all solved the problem of racism anywhere; look at the BNP or the Neo-Nazi problems that still plague Western Europe, albeit quietly. Censorship just forces these rats down into the sewers where they truly become dangerous because their arguments receive no debate, their claims receiving no reasonable question. As to those who remain racism-free, it is a essentially naive freedom borne of ignorance. It is far better to be exposed to a bad doctrine and to assemble reasonable resistance both academic and personal to it than to live blissfully unawares of a very real problem until it smacks one in the face... but, of course, everyone knows racism exists because it's a part of the way things are; people are different and fear difference so racism will always be around, just another base concept to work around instead of completely repress in the hopes it goes away. Just look what repressing sexuality did for the Victorians, and what today's antiseptic culture is doing to the immune systems of children. Nature (of which we are part) just has a tendency to do things in a way where the absolute refusal of How Things Are and the attempt to set up an entirely different Order inevitably fails for one reason or another; history's shown it time and time again.

Hmmm... that was quite the ramble. Anyway, it saddens me that many people who term themselves progressive condone the use of totalitarian strategies such as censorship, especially given how absolutely useless those strategies are for combating the root of the problem. Let racists have their say, in the open, so they can be disproven and logically disassembled in the open. Forcing them to hide (as they can never be truly eradicated; ideas have a bad habit of never dying) only plays into their hands in the long run by establishing themselves as an oppressed minority.

Umm..I hope these dickless ass hole realize a lot of these " Nazi " nations and " Nazi " regions are made for RP purposes...

I mean, for the love of God its a fucking game!

Its just a cheap shot tawrds Barry because he is, if you think of it, still a " new " author, so why not try and make him and his fans look like total white power nut jobs? C'mon....

When was the last time someone actually posted oocly that there here to recruit nazis and future klansmen and etc to do something like a dumb ass rally?

I can't decide who is worse now...the people who blatantly wrote this ignorantly, or those who may actually be on NS just to get more racists in the world...

Here we go again.

What I am for is Supression of Racism, not total supression of Freedom of Speech, why? Because in every country, except the "good ol'" US of A, there are anti racist laws. So stop attacking me for that, maybe now you'll realise why I'm getting annoyed.
Check your facts. There are not anti-racists laws in every country except for the US. Not even close. And just so we're clear on this...I'm not from the US, I'm coming at this issue from a US viewpoint, so leave your 'good ol's for someone who might be offended by that.


You are very good at saying that everyone else is saying black is white, when that is in fact what you are doing yourself.

Racism. It's a belief. You can not suppress a belief. With me so far? All you can do is make it illegal to express that belief in any way. That does not suppress the belief itself, just any actions based on that belief. See the difference?

Now I'm going to illustrate my point with an example, using something other than racism to perhaps help you see the difference between suppressing thoughts, and suppressing actions. *I am in no way, shape or form, suggesting that this following example is what you believe, nor am I saying it is the same as racism. It is simply a parallel I am making. Are you following along?

Take any religion. Let's say...Buddhism. Just to be fun. Now, let's say we want to suppress Buddhism*. We can ban the practice of Buddhism*, we can ban the support of Buddhism*, we can ban people even talking about Buddhism*, but we can not enforce a law that says Buddhism*, as a thought, or belief system is illegal. You tell me how you're going to get into someone's head and FORCE them to stop thinking something. You can't. You can just try to persuade.

You are saying, reppress only the speech that has to do with racism. As though that serves any purpose but to make it easier for you to believe everyone loves everyone else and nothing is wrong. You can play make-believe all you want...but not by taking away the right of (you guessed it!) even total bigoted assholes, to speak their hatefilled minds. Not even the hate legislation in my country does that, as long as they are not actively promoting hatred and violence.

Wow...a few hours later and boy did I ever sound snarky in that last post...*sheepish*

How did this thread end up on page 3? Come on people! If you agree with the OP article, or disagree with it...make some noise!!!

Let me give you an example: Homosexuality.

Society has changed to accept them. There are still jokes, insults etc... But society is generally more acceptant - especially compared to several decades ago.

To effectively reduce racism, as I said before, you need to change society - Which is already happening, though at a much slower rate. What we want to do is speed that up. Now I've stated this before: Children - You can teach them anything, do it in the right way, and it will be effective. Bombard them with advertisements on anti racism and pro equality, teach them in schools etc... Until they finish school, or even university (But still with outside advertisements like commercial advertisement).

That will have a significant impact on them.

If I did that with Buddhism, it will not be 100% effective, obviously, but rather 70% or more, my guess is 80 - 90%.

Society has to change, and that is a way to shape future generations.

You are saying, reppress only the speech that has to do with racism.

Amazing, gloss over what I say, and insinuate the rest. Effective :rolleyes:

Amazing, gloss over what I say, and insinuate the rest. Effective :rolleyes:
I was with you (as to understanding your argument, if not the idea that you should somehow try to 'ban racism') until this last little comment.

You have repeatedly said, "I'm not talking about all Freedom of Speech, just RACISM". I said, fine, you're not talking about banning all speech...just racist speech" and then you make a snarky comment and roll your eyes. So YOU go ahead and explain to me how my comment, based on yours, which seems a pretty accurate description of your stance, is insinuation...and what am I glossing over? On one hand you're talking about what is already going on (anti-racist campaigns) and on the other, you're talking about bringing in laws that FORCE anti-racism and BAN racist speech? So...?

Nazism is a perversion of Fascism into something completely evil.


Instead of mostly evil?

Parratoga is actually still around, though she hasn't posted on the forum since I returned to NS.

While I was never one of her fans, I must note that she was the only one of the old forum Nazis ever to discuss anything besides Nazism. Most of the NS Nazis were depressingly one-dimensional; they seemed to have no beliefs and no identities outside of Nazism. Which may be the root of their problems, now that I think about it.
The last time I saw her post was in the stretch of June to July or August of 2004. Interestingly, she claimed to no longer be a Nazi. She claimed that the reason that she hadn't been on was that Germanica had abused her, and she had run away. Don't know if what she said was true or not, as I don't know if she's posted more recently than that.

I was with you (as to understanding your argument, if not the idea that you should somehow try to 'ban racism') until this last little comment.

You have repeatedly said, "I'm not talking about all Freedom of Speech, just RACISM". I said, fine, you're not talking about banning all speech...just racist speech" and then you make a snarky comment and roll your eyes. So YOU go ahead and explain to me how my comment, based on yours, which seems a pretty accurate description of your stance, is insinuation...and what am I glossing over? On one hand you're talking about what is already going on (anti-racist campaigns) and on the other, you're talking about bringing in laws that FORCE anti-racism and BAN racist speech? So...?


My comment was that I have said that before, you completely ignored it.

What is already going on? No, that is not going on. You may have small groups saying: "Oh, racism is bad" and handing out leaflets, and not forgetting religion, but other than that, there isn't much to sway society on the level I'm talking about. A combination of laws, restriction of racist views and the teaching of future generations on a massive level is needed to completely diminish racism. Now, if you want, you can live in a society where one group is given a right to infringe the rights and safety of other groups (Which defeats the constitutional right: All men are created equal), but I'd rather live in a society, where you're allowed to express views, so long as they're not views that infringe on others, where racism is effectively reduced to something that's rarely heard of.

Ok, now THIS can seriously be considered pro racist views.

I am anti racist. You're saying my views are wrong and offensive.

As you can see, in an example, fighting words with words with an unstable crazed racist, who could be a potential Neo Nazi or KKK member will most likely NOT work. Especially in a country like the US, where guns and other lethal weapons are readily available.

Sdaeriji is as far from a racist as I can imagine. You are twisting their words.
Sdaeriji is stating that censorship , and the support thereof, is wrong and offensive. Ironically enough, it was practiced by Nazi Germany -- in burning books which they found 'offensive'.

I've always thought it better to let fools say their piece. By forcing it underground, you only foster complacency and make it appear it does not exist, give power to the silenced because they can make an argument for being oppressed, and, worst of all, you deny the rest of society the opportunity to show how utterly irredeemable and foolish such ideas are.

This quotation is commonly attributed to Voltaire:
"I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall defend, to the death, your right to say it."

Strangely enough, I agree with it -- while despising racists. Imagine that.

My comment was that I have said that before, you completely ignored it.

What is already going on? No, that is not going on. You may have small groups saying: "Oh, racism is bad" and handing out leaflets, and not forgetting religion, but other than that, there isn't much to sway society on the level I'm talking about. A combination of laws, restriction of racist views and the teaching of future generations on a massive level is needed to completely diminish racism. Now, if you want, you can live in a society where one group is given a right to infringe the rights and safety of other groups (Which defeats the constitutional right: All men are created equal), but I'd rather live in a society, where you're allowed to express views, so long as they're not views that infringe on others, where racism is effectively reduced to something that's rarely heard of.

You hit the nail right on the head
The only way to stop hate is knowledge
I hate to get philosophical but when Eve bit the apple of knoledge
It created hate and in order to defeat it again is knoledge for everyone everywhere

Yeah. I'm apparently under Max Barry's payola, according to one of them. Hahaha.

Heeeeeeeeey, how come you get paid and I don't? ;)

I might be a little behind the times, but has anyone else seen this (http://melbourne.indymedia.org/news/2005/08/94598_comment.php#94693) article decrying Max Barry and NationStates as a breeding ground for Nazis?



It seems that people are offended by Mr. Barry's insistence on a free exchange of ideas, because certain ideas offend them. As distasteful as National Socialism may be, they are still entitled to express their opinions. Mr. Barry has repeatedly stated he does not want to censor anyone's political beliefs, so long as they are stated civily. But for these people, this is not good enough. They want Nazis banned from this site because they do not believe they are entitled to free speech.

I hope I am not alone in my disgust for this attempt to censor distasteful opinions. If we always censored all opinions that are unpopular with a group of people, then no one would say anything. I am not sure how successful this e-mail camapaign of theirs has been (perhaps the moderators could be so kind as to find out), but I would like to start our own counter-e-mail campaign, telling them that we support Max Barry's tolerance of ALL opinions, good or bad, and that we do not appreciate an outside effort to tell us what is and isn't acceptable for us to read.

Here is their contact page (http://melbourne.indymedia.org/contact.php). The subject should be "Re: Neo-Nazis Using Kensington Author's Website to Organize". I am unable to find a way to contact the author himself, though if anyone finds a way, that would be great.

I hope I am not alone in this. Thank you. :)

And I don't get what the big deal is anyway. Nazi posters get chewed up and spit out whenever they start their rhetoric. :D

Just because most people here are right wing or neocons, does not mean that the site is fascist. Lots of people are centre and doing there best to stop the new fascisme.

Censorship so happens to be another aspect of the totalitarianism which people such as myself are against. It makes more sense to let the Nazis waste their own time spewing bile, then it does to begin telling people what they can and cannot think and say.

Sure, Naziism is bad. But it's better to showpeople why they are wrong then it is to drive them underground.

Bump.

Bump.Ow... :(

Censorship so happens to be another aspect of the totalitarianism which people such as myself are against. It makes more sense to let the Nazis waste their own time spewing bile, then it does to begin telling people what they can and cannot think and say.

Sure, Naziism is bad. But it's better to showpeople why they are wrong then it is to drive them underground.We can have that and prevent them from being allowed to wave a Swastika around.

Ow... :(

Ow?

We can have that and prevent them from being allowed to wave a Swastika around.

If you ban their symbol, then it helps their cause. If the symbol is banned, then it cannot be engaged and destroyed in a debate, and it goes underground, where what it represents goes unchallenged and draws more followers. All banning it does is make the cause stronger and give it a sense of martyrdom.

Ow?You "bumped" something, didn't you?
If you ban their symbol, then it helps their cause. If the symbol is banned, then it cannot be engaged and destroyed in a debate, and it goes underground, where what it represents goes unchallenged and draws more followers. All banning it does is make the cause stronger and give it a sense of martyrdom.I think we've discussed the issue of banning the swastika quite often, even though nothing's changed. I don't see how banning it made them creep underground. It just attracted some of them to come to the surface and let themselves be told "why" the swastika should remain banned.
Maybe they have a sense of martyrdom, but that has more to do with the fact that we outnumber them by a nice margin (the site you quoted at the beginning said that about 200 of the 119, 000 or so nations were Nazis... well they left out the number of total nations, but the 200 was their figure).
I'm all for letting them talk, but talking doesn't include a sigrune.

My comment was that I have said that before, you completely ignored it.

What is already going on? No, that is not going on. You may have small groups saying: "Oh, racism is bad" and handing out leaflets, and not forgetting religion, but other than that, there isn't much to sway society on the level I'm talking about. A combination of laws, restriction of racist views and the teaching of future generations on a massive level is needed to completely diminish racism. Now, if you want, you can live in a society where one group is given a right to infringe the rights and safety of other groups (Which defeats the constitutional right: All men are created equal), but I'd rather live in a society, where you're allowed to express views, so long as they're not views that infringe on others, where racism is effectively reduced to something that's rarely heard of.

So you want:

1) laws making racism illegal (again, this can only apply to actions, not to the racism itself)

2) restriction of racist views
- covered under laws
- does this also include any racist views? Like those in Othello? Or in Huckleberry Finn? Or the Jungle Book? Do we 'sanitise' these works so no nasty racist messages remain?

3) anti-racist curriculum
- it already exists. As do large anti-racist campaigns.

Maybe you could explain specifically how the laws and restrictions you envision would work?

Searching the NationStates region list, I came across a number of mini-sites within the game controlled by white power activists and being used to promote hate. They include (just Search in the Region drop-box on the main page):

Idaho,
I laughed. :D

Actually, if you think that of Mussolini, then you must have failed history, my most promenant subject. He was loved until the '30s, when his economic reforms started to fail, and he was influenced by Hitler to bring in racist laws.
He has been ranked, in a recent poll, the 35th greatest Italian. If that's not being loved, then I wonder what's the point in a poll for the "100 Greatest Italians" is for, if No.35 is void.

To say that he was completely void of racist views is stupid. Every leader at that time was racist. I mean, Churchill was one of the worst for that.
Well, Mussolini did turn away a lot of Italians when some higher-ups in his new government murdered one of his opponents, but for the most part he was well liked at first. When he began to go to war he started to lose their favor because his economy wasn't strong enough to hold up under the preasure of war and WWII finally caused enough discontent that he was destroyed.

His blackshirts beating up people had a negative impact as well, but that was a very difficult situation for him to address. If he dropped those blackshirts the Fascist government would fall apart, but if he allowed them to stay he'd lose his chance at the peaceful united Italy he wanted in the beginning.

BTW, Irish Empire, as I recall he was 34th. This is supported by Wiki, but I could be wrong.

Forums are even less moderated and frequent threads are being posted such as, "How Jews oppress the mentally ill."




I think i remember that thread wasnt it a joke?

I think i remember that thread wasnt it a joke?
Yes, but apparently a bunch of uppity Jews didn't realize that.

nazis will eliminate their own people, b/c they donot look right,, communism,
does not care who you are, as long as you do what youre told, you'll live...
this is why it lasted 80 yrs, and facism lasted 10 yrs. long live lenin!!

[snip]nah, I think its becaus of all the Seemingly pro nazi/skinhead/anti whatever nations and regions that popped up. the same thing can be said if you listed all the religious sights, and other stuff.

then again, you have some regions who were developed solely for the purpose of invading and taking over other regions.... hmmmm...

This campaign is the result of some fuckwit NSer who tried to blackmail Max Barry to ban all Fascist related material on site. They went about and posted this in many regions because they felt they had been so successful is disarming the majority of fascist nations on the site by region invading ect and felt they could no longer acheive major results with this method. It is a sad, sad day because those idiots have confused rpgs with reality. Keep up the good work Max, ignore their letter writing campaign to ban all political leanings that a minority of vocal liars are shouting about.

The server that hosts Melbourne Indymedia has suffered from a DDOS attack, taking the machine offline. This time around it appears to be politically motivated, though it is unknown if it was specifically directed at Indymedia. We are working on getting the site, along with Adelaide and Aotearoa Indymedias, back online as soon as possible. We ask for your patience. In the mean time, please visit other local Indymedias such as Perth and Sydney to post your stories or read news.
In solidarity
The Melbourne Indymedia Collective