Hate speech is Free Speech?

Casual conversation between friends. Anything goes (almost).
User avatar
Grigoris
Former staff member
Posts: 21398
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Hate speech is Free Speech?

Post by Grigoris »

Indeed... and it is not just the millennials that are the problem.

Lot's of people in my generation have latched onto, and lapped up, the current ultra-right trend.

Unfortunately, logic just does not work with these people. WWII was not a chance occurrence, one of the factors in its occurrence was the complete inability (on most sides) to comply with logic and reason. Like I said in another thread: Fascism is all about capitalizing on base emotions. When somebody is swept away by their base emotions, logic and reason cannot hold back the tide. Once the emotion abates, then the person has the opportunity to gaze upon the destruction caused by the expression of the emotion, but in most cases it is way too late.

Martial arts teaches you that when somebody is on a rage induced rampage you have to hit them REALLY hard somewhere really soft, then pin/control them and then try to talk logic to them.

Hitler himself had said (I cannot remember the quote exactly) that the only way to have stopped the destruction caused by Nazism was to have crushed the movement at its formative stages, completely and without mercy.
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde

User avatar
treehuggingoctopus
Posts: 1893
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 6:26 pm
Location: EU

Re: Hate speech is Free Speech?

Post by treehuggingoctopus »

Kim O'Hara wrote:Capitalism is part of it, but especially consumerism (i.e. hedonism, entitlement, greed) and neoliberalism (look after number one, social darwinism to go with economic darwinism)
You could add individualism here, too. It does belong together with neoliberalism and consumerism. I would go so far as to say that just as the latter two require each other, so do they depend on radical individualism.
Grigoris wrote:WWII was not a chance occurrence, one of the factors in its occurrence was the complete inability (on most sides) to comply with logic and reason.
And, tragically, in such situations it is quite sufficient that just one party orchestrates an institutionalised version of what you call "rage-induced rampage" for a nightmare to begin. For, as you point out,
Grigoris wrote:When somebody is swept away by their base emotions, logic and reason cannot hold back the tide.
Grigoris wrote:Martial arts teaches you that when somebody is on a rage induced rampage you have to hit them REALLY hard somewhere really soft, then pin/control them and then try to talk logic to them.

Hitler himself had said (I cannot remember the quote exactly) that the only way to have stopped the destruction caused by Nazism was to have crushed the movement at its formative stages, completely and without mercy.
Agreed. This is one of the lessons we on the Left seem to have forgotten in our complacency. We have become uncannily disconnected from what is going on around as well as from the people around, squeamish (is anyone seriously unsure whether it is OK to break a fascist nose?) and intellectually lazy, failing to realize that there are indeed human actions and social phenomena which one must not tolerate at any cost. Slowly waking up, though.

Regarding Mr Trump:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... resistance
To offer care and affection to sentient beings
In desperate situations who lack protection
Brings just as much merit as the meditation
On emptiness with compassion as its core—
So it has been said by glorious Lord Atisha.

Chatral Sangye Dorje Rinpoche

If you cannot generate an altruistic mind, even extensive retreat will be of not much benefit.
Garchen Triptrul Rinpoche

User avatar
明安 Myoan
Former staff member
Posts: 2493
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2012 7:11 am

Re: Hate speech is Free Speech?

Post by 明安 Myoan »

Malcolm, people with hateful views perhaps respond to shame if they can see the error of the views, but if the motivation to stop hate is also hate and anger, nothing gets done. The conversation is shut down.
It's not a matter of condoning hate speech but of putting our money where our mouth is as Buddhists and responding to ignorance and hatred with compassion.
Our mother beings locked in hate are bound for a hellish destination unless something changes.
With a heart wandering in ignorance down this path and that, to guide me I simply say Namu-Amida-Butsu. -- Ippen

Reciting the nembutsu and believing in birth in the Pure Land naturally give rise to the Three Minds and the Four Modes of Practice. -- Master Hōnen

madhusudan
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 5:54 pm

Re: Hate speech is Free Speech?

Post by madhusudan »

Thanks to the input in this thread, I think I'm beginning to get a rough picture of the current view. I sort of amalgamated the root ideas and themes inferred from the various images, memes, and written posts.

It's an appeal to emergency.

Because of current political events and social phenomena, former attitudes toward free speech are outdated. Avenues such as public speaking and the Internet are being used as platforms for the dissemination of hate-filled propaganda. Conventional rebuttal in debate is almost tacit support for hatred. We are in the 11th hour, seconds to the midnight of another Holocaust. Support for absolute freedom of speech is equivalent to supporting these Nazi-like ideas, which must be fought at any cost.

Furthermore, a righteous rage should be aroused, and physical violence is surely called for. In the suppression of evil, aggressive violence is self-defense. A lack of willingness to employ all necessary means may indicate some measure of "hate" has crept into one's pure ideology, and such people's commitment to Social Justice may be open to some question.

User avatar
明安 Myoan
Former staff member
Posts: 2493
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2012 7:11 am

Re: Hate speech is Free Speech?

Post by 明安 Myoan »

I hope that last paragraph is your assessment of others' views and not a recommendation you've arrived at.
With a heart wandering in ignorance down this path and that, to guide me I simply say Namu-Amida-Butsu. -- Ippen

Reciting the nembutsu and believing in birth in the Pure Land naturally give rise to the Three Minds and the Four Modes of Practice. -- Master Hōnen

madhusudan
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 5:54 pm

Re: Hate speech is Free Speech?

Post by madhusudan »

Correct.

madhusudan
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 5:54 pm

Re: Hate speech is Free Speech?

Post by madhusudan »

That's what I'm reading and I think it's dangerous.

User avatar
明安 Myoan
Former staff member
Posts: 2493
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2012 7:11 am

Re: Hate speech is Free Speech?

Post by 明安 Myoan »

Agreed. I asked about that very thing in another thread: http://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=77&t=24702

Some good replies.
With a heart wandering in ignorance down this path and that, to guide me I simply say Namu-Amida-Butsu. -- Ippen

Reciting the nembutsu and believing in birth in the Pure Land naturally give rise to the Three Minds and the Four Modes of Practice. -- Master Hōnen

Malcolm
Posts: 32142
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Hate speech is Free Speech?

Post by Malcolm »

Monlam Tharchin wrote:Malcolm, people with hateful views perhaps respond to shame if they can see the error of the views, but if the motivation to stop hate is also hate and anger, nothing gets done. The conversation is shut down.
Some conversations are not worth having. Conversations where people are allowed justify their bigotry and hatred are not worth having. In fact, people know that being racist and sexist is wrong, which is why the right spends so much time pretending that racism and sexism are old problems we do not face anymore. Then, they uses dog whistles like "crime", "fraud," and so on to enact and continue the same racist policies, like voter id laws and so on.
It's not a matter of condoning hate speech but of putting our money where our mouth is as Buddhists and responding to ignorance and hatred with compassion.
Sometimes you have yell at children to prevent them from playing with fire.

Our mother beings locked in hate are bound for a hellish destination unless something changes.
We cannot change others, we can only change ourselves. This is the unfortunate limitation we have.

Malcolm
Posts: 32142
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Hate speech is Free Speech?

Post by Malcolm »

treehuggingoctopus wrote:there are indeed human actions and social phenomena which one must not tolerate at any cost.
Yes, this is the lesson the rise of Fascism taught us in the 1930's.

User avatar
treehuggingoctopus
Posts: 1893
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 6:26 pm
Location: EU

Re: Hate speech is Free Speech?

Post by treehuggingoctopus »

madhusudan wrote:evil
Not my word. Metaphysical framing does not help.
madhusudan wrote:aggressive violence is self-defense
Punching someone in their face is "aggressive violence"? How then would you describe leg-breaking, face-cutting, stabbings, GBH and murder, which is what Nazi thugs have always done in Europe -- and now are doing more openly than ever, with little fear of being caught and punished?

I hate violence. But passive resistance against boneheads will only get you into hospital (if you are not unlucky, that is). You could just as well try passive resistance on the Daesh.
To offer care and affection to sentient beings
In desperate situations who lack protection
Brings just as much merit as the meditation
On emptiness with compassion as its core—
So it has been said by glorious Lord Atisha.

Chatral Sangye Dorje Rinpoche

If you cannot generate an altruistic mind, even extensive retreat will be of not much benefit.
Garchen Triptrul Rinpoche

Malcolm
Posts: 32142
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Hate speech is Free Speech?

Post by Malcolm »

treehuggingoctopus wrote:
madhusudan wrote:evil
Not my word. Metaphysical framing does not help.
madhusudan wrote:aggressive violence is self-defense
Punching someone in their face is "aggressive violence"? How then would you describe leg-breaking, face-cutting, stabbings, GBH and murder, which is what Nazi thugs have always done in Europe -- and now are doing more openly than ever, with little fear of being caught and punished?

I hate violence. But passive resistance against boneheads will only get you into hospital (if you are not unlucky, that is). You could just as well try passive resistance on the Daesh.

Of course, these things are always described as "crimes" and never as politically motivated violence. This is the huge problem with identifying terrorism engaged in by people of Muslim backgrounds as Islamic Terrorism. It isn't. It is political violence through and through with nothing religious about it at all. Do people use religious themes to motivate political violence? Of course they do. But we must make a hard distinction between political violence and religions. One of the reasons why people in the Obama administration refuse to use the term Radical Islamic Terrorism is that to claim that this is our enemy violates the Constitution in a way that say identifying Communist Terrorism, etc., does not. This is why also there is such a strong push on the part of the Trump Administration and the right in general to redefine Islam as a political movement rather than a religious faith. Well, allowing the right to redefine Islam as a political movement is a very slippery slope.
Last edited by Malcolm on Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
treehuggingoctopus
Posts: 1893
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 6:26 pm
Location: EU

Re: Hate speech is Free Speech?

Post by treehuggingoctopus »

Malcolm wrote:Of course, these things are always described as "crimes" and never as politically motivated violence. This is the huge problem with identifying terrorism engaged in by people of Muslim backgrounds as Islamic Terrorism. It isn't. It is political violence through and through with nothing religious about it at all.
Absolutely.
To offer care and affection to sentient beings
In desperate situations who lack protection
Brings just as much merit as the meditation
On emptiness with compassion as its core—
So it has been said by glorious Lord Atisha.

Chatral Sangye Dorje Rinpoche

If you cannot generate an altruistic mind, even extensive retreat will be of not much benefit.
Garchen Triptrul Rinpoche

User avatar
Zhen Li
Posts: 1535
Joined: Sun Apr 07, 2013 8:15 am
Location: Kamakura

Re: Hate speech is Free Speech?

Post by Zhen Li »

Malcolm wrote:
treehuggingoctopus wrote:
madhusudan wrote:evil
Not my word. Metaphysical framing does not help.
madhusudan wrote:aggressive violence is self-defense
Punching someone in their face is "aggressive violence"? How then would you describe leg-breaking, face-cutting, stabbings, GBH and murder, which is what Nazi thugs have always done in Europe -- and now are doing more openly than ever, with little fear of being caught and punished?

I hate violence. But passive resistance against boneheads will only get you into hospital (if you are not unlucky, that is). You could just as well try passive resistance on the Daesh.

Of course, these things are always described as "crimes" and never as politically motivated violence. This is the huge problem with identifying terrorism engaged in by people of Muslim backgrounds as Islamic Terrorism. It isn't. It is political violence through and through with nothing religious about it at all. Do people use religious themes to motivate political violence? Of course they do. But we must make a hard distinction between political violence and religions. One of the reasons why people in the Obama administration refuse to use the term Radical Islamic Terrorism is that to claim that this is our enemy violates the Constitution in a way that say identifying Communist Terrorism, etc., does not. This is why also there is such a strong push on the part of the Trump Administration and the right in general to redefine Islam as a political movement rather than a religious faith. Well, allowing the right to redefine Islam as a political movement is a very slippery slope.
Last week you were willing to accept Grigoris' claim that killing Rohingya is done in the name of enforcing the five precepts (which is a false claim anyway), but you are not willing to admit that killing people while shouting a praise to the Islamic deity is done in the name of Islam?

Let us use one set of standards for all humans. I see no reason to privilege Muslims over Buddhists or Buddhists over Muslims.

Jeff H
Posts: 925
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2014 8:56 pm
Location: Vermont, USA

Re: Hate speech is Free Speech?

Post by Jeff H »

Granted, it sounds idealistic and naïve to talk about “hating the affliction but loving the afflicted” in the face of rising hate-based nationalism.

But, at the very least, it should be incumbent upon some of the more erudite and well-seasoned practitioners here to say something about how Buddhists can engage this enemy without engendering anger and hatred within ourselves, thus negating bodhicitta.



Edit: I just reread the thread MT referred to earlier, "Righteous hatred", where I found this reply from smcj very helpful. But in general that thread is about personal, one-on-one interactions. Here we are talking about some form of organized, aggressive resistance to what we all see happening around us. How can we bring our principles to this fight?
Last edited by Jeff H on Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
We who are like children shrink from pain but love its causes. - Shantideva

User avatar
Grigoris
Former staff member
Posts: 21398
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Hate speech is Free Speech?

Post by Grigoris »

Zhen Li wrote:Last week you were willing to accept Grigoris' claim that killing Rohingya is done in the name of enforcing the five precepts (which is a false claim anyway), but you are not willing to admit that killing people while shouting a praise to the Islamic deity is done in the name of Islam?
The second example/instance is a false claim too: Muslims recognize Abraham's pact with God (since they consider themselves descendants of Abraham too), a pact that put an end to human sacrifice.

I have been working with (mainly Muslim) refugees from 2006 and NONE OF THEM has ever expressed support for the antics of the Taliban and Daesh, ALL OF THEM consider the actions of these two groups as anti-Islamic.
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde

User avatar
treehuggingoctopus
Posts: 1893
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 6:26 pm
Location: EU

Re: Hate speech is Free Speech?

Post by treehuggingoctopus »

Jeff H wrote:hatred
is perfectly useless. But I do not think anyone has advocated or even defended it here. Actually, the thread is devoted to neo-Nazis arguing that hate speech be considered free speech, and therefore allowed into public discourse. It is us rabid lefties who are saying it must not be.
To offer care and affection to sentient beings
In desperate situations who lack protection
Brings just as much merit as the meditation
On emptiness with compassion as its core—
So it has been said by glorious Lord Atisha.

Chatral Sangye Dorje Rinpoche

If you cannot generate an altruistic mind, even extensive retreat will be of not much benefit.
Garchen Triptrul Rinpoche

User avatar
Zhen Li
Posts: 1535
Joined: Sun Apr 07, 2013 8:15 am
Location: Kamakura

Re: Hate speech is Free Speech?

Post by Zhen Li »

Grigoris wrote:
Zhen Li wrote:Last week you were willing to accept Grigoris' claim that killing Rohingya is done in the name of enforcing the five precepts (which is a false claim anyway), but you are not willing to admit that killing people while shouting a praise to the Islamic deity is done in the name of Islam?
The second example/instance is a false claim too: Muslims recognize Abraham's pact with God (since they consider themselves descendants of Abraham too), a pact that put an end to human sacrifice.

I have been working with (mainly Muslim) refugees from 2006 and NONE OF THEM has ever expressed support for the antics of the Taliban and Daesh, ALL OF THEM consider the actions of these two groups as anti-Islamic.
Likewise, any Buddhists I have met consider the Rohingya killings to be a violation of the first precepts and abhorrent, yet you still feel it justified to consider such actions as done in the name of the five precepts. If you can't see your cognitive dissonance then I don't know what more can be done. I have met Muslims who consider terrorism justified, and tried to convince me that it is fine, as someone who truly believes their religion should be expected to live up to the demands of their religion. Killing for them wasn't for human sacrifice, which wouldn't have taken place in ancient Judaism anyway, but as the final resort in the encounter with kafirs as stipulated in three schools of Islamic law: first, they should convert willingly, if not, they should be made subject to dimmi status, and if that is not possible, they should be killed. We find no such doctrine in Buddhism.
treehuggingoctopus wrote:
Jeff H wrote:hatred
is perfectly useless. But I do not think anyone has advocated or even defended it here. Actually, the thread is devoted to neo-Nazis arguing that hate speech be considered free speech, and therefore allowed into public discourse. It is us rabid lefties who are saying it must not be.
I would interpret a number of posts in this thread as incitement to violence and an encouragement of hatred. I don't believe violence can be done out of compassion and can only really be done out of hatred. There is no genuine neo-Nazi threat in the world today that would need to be countered with violence as such a movement would only appear farcical and their violent suppression would only serve to embolden them and draw comical parallels to Nazi suppression of dissent itself.

As Engels wrote to Marx, "it really seems as though old Hegel, in the guise of the World Spirit, were directing history from the grave and, with the greatest conscientiousness, causing everything to be re-enacted twice over, once as grand tragedy and the second time as rotten farce."

User avatar
treehuggingoctopus
Posts: 1893
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 6:26 pm
Location: EU

Re: Hate speech is Free Speech?

Post by treehuggingoctopus »

Zhen Li wrote:I would interpret a number of posts in this thread as incitement to violence and an encouragement of hatred. I don't believe violence can be done out of compassion and can only really be done out of hatred. There is no genuine neo-Nazi threat in the world today that would need to be countered with violence as such a movement would only appear farcical and their violent suppression would only serve to embolden them and draw comical parallels to Nazi suppression of dissent itself
I am sorry, Zhen Li. I wish you would open your eyes.
To offer care and affection to sentient beings
In desperate situations who lack protection
Brings just as much merit as the meditation
On emptiness with compassion as its core—
So it has been said by glorious Lord Atisha.

Chatral Sangye Dorje Rinpoche

If you cannot generate an altruistic mind, even extensive retreat will be of not much benefit.
Garchen Triptrul Rinpoche

Malcolm
Posts: 32142
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Hate speech is Free Speech?

Post by Malcolm »

Zhen Li wrote: Last week you were willing to accept Grigoris' claim that killing Rohingya is done in the name of enforcing the five precepts (which is a false claim anyway)...

I made no such statement from which you can deduce this.

I supported his observation that nations nominally devoted to Buddhism can perpetrate horrible crimes of political violence against human beings.

Locked

Return to “Lounge”