I agree.
That depends. We already have restrictions on inflammatory speech.
I think that we all need to work harder to understand what it means to defeat some other view. One can win a debate with aggression and lies. I am not in favor of that.
There may be other conditions as well in which the provocateur is not completely blameless.
We’ve seen three years of irresponsible journalism from MSNBC and others, but even that is covered by the 1st, and they do not deserve to be beaten up.
I think the role some have played the last three years can be properly described as opposing our republican system of elections.
Me, too.
Yes, I mentioned them.
Perhaps, but this is still the way to defeat views such as bigotry.
I’m not sure there has been a defense of it, certainly not by @dvdjs, though I think there is plenty of defense and even advocacy of it in the progressive movement generally
I think that you go out of bounds with what you call irresponsible journalism.
Again, I disagree that this characterization is proper.
When some of these networks have had people like Brennan on clearly lying about have specific knowledge, I consider that irresponsible.
And the 1st gives us the right to hold these kinds of opposing views
Blaming the victim is defending the attackers…
When was the last time a jounalist had the snot beat out of him by a mob of Trump supporters (causing him to be hospitalized) and his equipment smashed at a Trump rally?
If she was wearing a MAGA hat, definitely…
@dvdjs did not go into details about about the circumstances, so I’ll let him respond to this. My assumption was he meant a truly provocative act beyond just speech.
Would she be considered “completely blameless”? That is what we were discussing before you clumsily pivoted to “deserved”.
What provacative thing is Ngo accused of that would excuse the beatdown he received?
Do I need to supply more detail about a well-known term?
What did Ngo do to entice this white mob to attack him? Reporting while conservative?
AFAIK Trump is the only candidate who has encouraged violence against his opponents at his rallies. I hope to be delighted if his supporters resist his calls.
As far as I’m aware, nobody has been killed by “antifa” in the last few years, yet countless people have been murdered by the right. I don’t “support” antifa (in as much as that means anything) because they’re pretty ineffectual and liberal, but this focus on their violence (and the supposed violence of the Left) seems weird considering how many right wing shootings there have been in the last few years.
