On 08/17/2017 06:03 AM, John Newman wrote: > On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 09:28:14PM -0500, Shawn K. Quinn wrote: >> On 08/16/2017 03:57 PM, Mike Duvos wrote: >>> It will be interesting to see what happens with the site, because >>> right now, they are kind of the Spotted Owl in the free speech forest. >> Honestly, I think we're overdue for SCOTUS to make some new rulings on >> the First Amendment, though I am not sure I want the current SCOTUS to >> be the one making those rulings. (We all know Merrick Garland should be >> on the bench in place of Gorsuch, or at least should have gotten a >> proper "nay" vote.) >> >> How much of what is or was on The Daily Stormer could be qualified in >> some form as "fighting words" (i.e. in the words of Justice Frank Murphy >> "those [words] which by their very utterances inflict injury or tend to >> incite an immediate breach of the peace")? How much of what has been >> posted to this list could potentially qualify? >> >> I'm not Jewish and nowhere near black, yet I find what happened in >> Charlottesville horrifying. This is 2017, not 1957 or 1877. > I agree, and I'm not jewish or anywhere near black either, but I > found the Charlottesville shit disgusting as well. My visceral > reaction to it, particularly to the Vice documentary that was put > out very quickly on Sunday (an effective piece of propaganda against > the neo-nazis), followed by the dailystormer article totally > celebrating the murder of Heather Heyer, was "Fuck Andrew Anglin". > > But, upon calming down (and sobering up, actually), I think this > is setting a dangerous precedent. Being blocked at the level of the > domain registrar
Their concern is most likely their ability to be acknowledged as a registrar in nations where espousing Nazism is outlawed. The st0rmer went BEYOND simple fascism. The author, in calling Heather Heyer (paraphrase) a fat thirty-something year old woman who hadn't bred, so she was worthless, was promoting the denying of her, and all other 'fat thirty-something year old woman who hadn't bred', right to exist. That's most likely prosecutable HATE SPEECH in the US (Sessions SURELY won't), and it's illegal almost everywhere in the Western world. Rr > is different than being thrown out of a hosting > service, and this seems like a slippery slope. We block nazi bullshit > now, whose to say corporate interests don't creep in and use this > as a wedge to block sites supposedly "infringing copyright", or any > of a number of possibilities. > > I guess what I'm saying is, I stand by "Fuck Andrew Anglin", but I > think this hysterical reaction to take down his (admittedly vile) > website, even at the level of the domain registrar, is going too > far.
