Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: The Philosopher who wrote (24604)	8/24/2001 4:31:59 PM
From: Solon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

Do you have evidence that I'm wrong? It is rather difficult to measure what has been prevented if it has been prevented, you know what I mean! Just as you have no way of proving that the legislation has NOT prevented... I can perhaps INFER from the character of some of the racists who were arrested, and who had their ability to organize and to incite...uh... restricted--that the KKK's of society could be potentially much stronger and more dangerous had such legislation against incitement not been in place. BTW, insofar as your opposition to this social arrow is based on your fear of the tyranny of government or society--I understand and share many of those concerns. I would discuss that in a separate polemic. However, the one is potential while somebody meeting in a farmyard to recruit people for killing jews is actual. The other day I spoke with someone who ranted that the (expletive) jews were running the world, they were stealing all the money, they were ruining sausages by putting skin in them, and on and on and on. Was he mentally ill? I don't know. Mental illness is hard to define. If he was a young man instead of old, and if he was charismatic and powerful and carried an automatic--would I want him questioned? I think so. If I were a jew, I would insist... Nobody in a community should need to live in fear for their families. A community should act to protect all its members from this. In a society that supports telling people where they can smoke on private property, and how they must dress in their car--I don't suppose that certain initiatives to allow individuals to retain their right to the "pursuit of happiness", without fearing for their lives, can be considered all that onerous...