Summary
A group of masked men with Nazi flags protested outside a performance of “The Diary of Anne Frank” in Howell, Michigan, shouting antisemitic slurs.
Audience members were reportedly frightened and needed escorts to their cars. The Fowlerville Community Theatre, which staged the play, described the protesters’ presence as a disturbing reminder of the fear faced by Holocaust victims.
The Anti-Defamation League condemned the display. The incident follows other recent displays of racism in the area.
What you’re advocating is vigilantism. In a working society, if they are committing acts of violence (aka crime), you shouldn’t need to advocate “overwhelming violence” in response, you should be advocating a working police force who can arrest them, and hold them safely until they can be judged by a jury of their peers.
I feel like vigilantism is the left making an equivalent argument to the right’s “more guns = more safety”. Unless you live in a lawless warzone, you shouldn’t want either.
You expect cops to arrest their friends? You have a very charitable view of the kind of people that become cops.
Well until now in this discussion we haven’t established that cops were the ones committing waving the flags. But unfortunately you’re right, “some of those that work forces are the same that burn crosses.”
Speaking ideally, yes obviously we all expect cops to arrest their friends when their friends are committing crimes. Unfortunately that doesn’t happen nearly as much as it should.
Yeah well apparently we don’t have a working society any more
Then let’s make one.
My brother in christ that is literally what they are trying to do
No sir, scroll up and re-read the suggestion about “meeting violence with overwhelming violence”.
So when is violence in response to fascists and specifically Nazis okay? Because they start with rhetoric then move fairly quickly on to violence. As in we are in the last part of their rhetoric as they are now openly waving flags without challenge.
When our police and justice system fails, and we officially live in a failed state, then all bets are off.
But until then, if your neighbor yells “I think you all should die” out his window, it doesn’t suddenly justify the neighbors taking matters into their own hands, busting down his door, and “overwhelming” him. That’s wild west law.
You don’t bust down his door, but when he in the street with a NAZI flag, feel free to bust his nose.
That’s the same thing. It’s inconsistent to argue that it’s ok to violate a person’s autonomy for what they yell in public, but not for what they yell out their window.
I mean, realisticly I’m not going to stop you from punching a self-described nazi, I’m just going to ask that you be consistent about when you believe it’s ethical to do so.
Edit: the US actually has a legal grey area around this topic deemed “fighting words”, which is speech that the jury agrees is immediately threatening enough that the person had no choice but to physically respond. This obviously can get pretty unethical in its interpretation. If a nazi yells “fuck the jews” outside an Anne Frank play, I think no jury would have a problem if they get hit. Does that also mean if someone else yells “fuck the police” outside a police station, the cops are justified in beating them?