SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: The Barracudaâ„¢ who wrote (201343)8/13/2017 10:48:19 AM
From: grusum  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 224722
 
"Both groups of protestors were hoping for an incident."

the point is that there should never be 'counter' protests. a protest is a form of free speech as long as it's not violent. as long as the protesters themselves are not being violent, they have the right to protest. counter protesting is anti free speech.

for instance, if no one counter protests the kkk, there would be little interest in it because the vast majority of people are not racists. it's the same for any protest, no matter how much one disagrees with it. everyone should have the right to free speech. antifa was there to shut down free speech. if they don't show up, no one gets hurt.

in addition, i don't necessarily believe the original protesters were hoping for an incident. they could have been there as advertised, to protest the removal of the robert e. lee statue. i believe the vast majority of them were not hoping for an incident. it is antifa that's sparking the violence. no one else. if antifa wants to protest something, they have that right. let them protest whatever they want. they have the right to protest freedom if they choose. but they don't have a right to counter protest. to shut down someone else's free speech.

the problem for antifa is that they could never find anything to protest because everything they believe in is wrong and stupid.