If you think that, sure. I am too tired to debate for the most part anymore. You guys have even less of a reason to strike.
Sue them for it. They deserve it.
Rilandse is right. You can't have your cake and eat it too. If we must ban something from the extreme side of one spectrum, we must do it to the other. Otherwise, I just can't accept the unfairness being brought out in the region.
The Communication Officer will go on strike, as well.
And now, as I sit here, I watch the region at a standstill. With a side of free-speakers and a side of heavy anti-nazi's. All I can do for now is sit back, wait until either I break or the other side breaks, and relax.
He said it was an example bud. He doesnt truly believe it.
If people start advocating for the deaths of people it should be banned.
Did I stutter?
I hate communism. It's sh*tty af.
But I dont think it's any sort of equivalence to fascism. People who advocate for bigotry or murder should be banned. No matter where on the spectrum they lie.
No it doesn't. Communism can be non-violent, it is hypothetically possible. It often does involve violent revolution and murder, but that is not inherent to be a communist.
Fascism is an extremely nationalistic and violent ideology, it involves suppression and violence against those who are deemed the enemy. It is an inherently authoritarian ideology, if you remove the violence and murder, its not fascism anymore.
I don't even like communism, it's awful, but I fail to understand why we cant say something like "advocating for the murder of or bigotry against any group is against the rules"
What is wrong with that?
The first decade of Franco's rule following the end of the Civil War in 1939 saw continued repression and the killing of an undetermined number of political opponents. Estimation is difficult and controversial, but the total number of people who were killed during this period probably lies somewhere between 15,000 and 50,000.