New Zealand Bans Manifesto

[Yonadav]

If freedom of speech doesn't protect hateful, sexist, racist, violence-advocating bigoted speech, isn't the whole exercise rather pointless?  The whole idea that someone else can tell me which books I can have in my possession is anathema to me.

Boru

It protects the first three, not the fourth, and a wide range of other things that are none of the four.  Free speech not protecting incitement doesn't reduce free speech to pointlessness.

I'm not so sure. I grew up in a time and place where violence was advocated against communists all the time. The only good commie was a dead commie. If a person sincerely believes that there is a coming race war and wants people to prepare for it, I don't see the difference between that and the good dead commie nonsense.

We are very hit and miss with the advocacy for violence. I was appalled by how badly libtards wanted to punch Nick Sandman in the face for having done basically nothing to offend them so badly. Nick Sandman is a minor. Since when did it become acceptable to talk about punching children in the face? But some ridiculous writers felt perfectly free to write about Nick Sandman's punchable face. Our media deliberately spun the image of the Covington children to be such villains that their school was getting terrorist threats.

So tell me, Mr. ItsOKtocensorfreespeech, when can we go arrest the writers who wrote about Nick Sandman's punchable face? They were inciting violence against a child, after all. I'm completely disgusted with them. Should we make it illegal for people to read those articles or to possess them? Censorship is always going to favor some sort of bigotry. It will be OK for these guys to incite violence, but not OK for those guys to incite violence. Censorship is always about a brand of bigotry.