The trouble with hate speech

Written By: - Date published: 1:02 pm, March 16th, 2019 - 319 comments
Categories: uncategorized - Tags:

 

Yesterday was a terrible day.

It should have been a great day, celebrating our young citizens’ commitment to sustainability and their message to us that we need to do better.  Our young people were magnificent.  Like these

And these.

Then there was the terrorist attack on two Christchurch mosques where at least 49 kiwis were killed.

How could this happen in godzone?

The fucker involved made it a social media event.  He had a twitter account where he posted photos of magazines with strange stuff written on them.  He also had a live video feed of the event.  I suggest you do not watch it or post links to it.

He also had a manifesto.  Again do not post links to it or content from it but it is basically full of ultra right wing trash.  Essentially white people are being crowded out because people with dark skin breed more and the UN was to blame.

The day before Green co leader James Shaw was attacked.

This idiot also apparently had issues with the United Nations and more specifically the UN Migration Pact.

These events bring into stark highlight the debate that happened last year about Lauren Southern and Stefan Molyneux.  Remember them?  Two shock jocks who toured the world insulting different cultures as part of a business model.

There were a few posts here on their antics.  I reached the position that because they were only interested in hate speech they should not be tolerated.  In an earlier post I said this:

Meanwhile there continues to be an intense debate on the left amongst those who think that the right to freedom of speech should be sacrosanct and those who thinks that punching a fascist can occasionally be justified.

Sure the contest of ideas is important. But it appears that Southern and Molyneux were not that interested in there being an open informed debate when you consider the terms on which they expected you to agree before letting you into listen to them.

And dang it but this leftie thinks that we should not have to allow publicly provided facilities to be used for the propagation of monetised hate speech with strict entry requirements.  Especially if they have in the past deliberately picked fights with muslims and acted to disrupt the efforts of others to save refugees from drowning.

Their ideas and their philosophy based on hatred of diversity are dangerous.  As yesterday shows. Their comments on the dangers of multiculturalism reflect the same twisted thinking that the attacker had.

And sorry to get political but National’s dangerous rhetoric about the UN Migration Pact has not helped.  When a mainstream party uses outlandish rhetoric for political advantage it should be condemned.

I am pleased National has taken down its petition about the UN compact.  It should not have been up in the first place.

Others deserve condemnation.

Like this guy.

Southern herself was pretty defensive.

But she has difficulty explaining this tweet from two years ago.

While others showed extreme grace in this most testing of times.


They are us.  Which is why this is so upsetting.

319 comments on “The trouble with hate speech”

  1. mickysavage 1

    Please keep this respectful. I have changed the image at the top because the original I chose was upsetting.

    • reason 1.1

      Its never the speakers who pay for their hate speech …. https://twitter.com/hashtag/49lives?src=hash

      Recent examples of fanning fears and feeding sick minds with myths ….

      “We need migrants, but we don’t need leftovers from Middle East terrorist regimes,” he said in the 2005 newsletter.

      Mr English finished the spiel by saying the green light Labour had sent to the world would “certainly” be turned red by National.”
      https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2017/02/bill-english-we-don-t-need-middle-east-leftovers.html

      ” Jihadi brides ” ….. a snazzy way of specifically saying female Muslim terrorists / suicide bombers … Federation of Islamic Associations president Hazim Arafeh said the comments were hurtful and painted muslims with the same brush as terrorists. https://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/299191/no-apology-from-govt-over-%27jihadi-brides%27-claims

      Whipping up fears …. with 1000’s of fictitious refugee boat people …..tacking on an extra 6000km of ocean travel in leaky tubs and sailing for our shores … perhaps helping nutty gun club members grow nutty beliefs …. like their military style weapons will defend ( white ) new Zealand. ”

      And as there is going to be some crazy talk by hardcore firearm reform resistors … some information regarding reform.

      “1987 England Mass Shooting prompts new gun laws •0 Mass Shootings since
      1995 Australia MS prompts new gun laws •0 MS since
      1996 Scotland MS prompts new gun laws •0 MS since 2009 Germany MS prompts new gun laws •1 MS since
      1999 America MS prompts zilch •5000+ MS since ” https://twitter.com/MuslimIQ

      ….

  2. marty mars 2

    Yes many of us fight hate speech all the time. We said about those hate mongers from Canada that there was danger and we were told it’s just words and free speech. Some of us said it about our locals too who push hate speech like brash and we were told oh its just words and free speech. Hate speech? Ask any Māori or non pale immigrant, or person of colour about daily casual racism and hate speech.

    The haters are us, the ugly us, and the immigrants and refugees are us too.

  3. esoteric pineapples 3

    Plenty of hate speech has been coming out of the anti-1080 people which I think has been taken far too lightly. Eugenie Sage should have been given personal security some time ago. Golriz Ghahraman probably needs it too. While the focus has now turned to white racists (later than it should have), all purveyors of hate speech need to be taken seriously. There are a growing number of New Zealand facebook pages with a strong conservative streak with posts ranging from the tasteless to the objectionable with a general theme that New Zealand has gone downhill and targets for blame include “political correctness”, women, Maori rights and so on. One conspiracy theory on them at the moment is that DoC wants to wipe out all the introduced species to New Zealand. They hate the Greens, have a love/hate relationship with NZ First, target a few individuals in Labour, and give National a free pass for the most part.

    • Graeme 3.1

      I’ve found the more extreme anti 1080 people to be utterly terrifying, and having a lot in common with the guy who did this. Lazy hunters with poor skills and attitudes, often with military style semi autos and all the toys, but cheap copies. Hunting involves driving up in their surf or ranger and flicking a light around, when they don’t see anything it’s because 1080

    • cleangreen 3.2

      esoteric pineapples.and Micky,

      I have been the receiver of hate speak and road rage over the 19 yrs fighting for regional rail in this country.

      Standing up for what your heart says to you what is right sometimes carries a ‘heavy burden’ but when my wife and i stood at the Gisborne climate rally on Friday surrounded by an awesome 100 young people chanting save our planet now it made my heart sing, it was one of the best days of my life but by the time we got back to our lifestyle 7 acres in the hills by 5 pm the news hit us like a hurricane.

      Why did all this death and destruction of so many lives happen then, we are always searching our minds now.

      Especially as you say Micky after those wonderful young showed us how dedicated they are to save our planet.

      We must go on pushing for climate action now because we have no choice here.

      https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change-melting-ice-antarctica-greenland-arctic-global-warming-gulf-stream-amoc-a8766521.html

      ‘Climate chaos’: Melting ice sheets will trigger extreme weather across the world, warn scientists

  4. Cinny 4

    The silence from the likes of judith and paula via twitter speaks volumes. JS

  5. Stunned mullet 5

    As demonstrated by this and many other blogs in NZ one person’s hate speech is another’s normal discourse, the us and them divide and vilification of the other be it political, religion, country, sporting is out of control and destructive.

    Which is why I’d chosen to limit the amount of time I spend on blogs and as of now I’ve decided this’ll be my last post at thestandard.

    • gsays 5.1

      “Which is why I’d chosen to limit the amount of time I spend on blogs and as of now I’ve decided this’ll be my last post at the standard”.

      That’s unfortunate SM, if it is what you need to be safe, fair enough.

      I value contributions from folk I disagree with, if their argument is sound, then it gives me a chance to look closer at my beliefs.

      Edit. As to the divisive nature of society you mentioned, I agree, that’s why I feel a duty to look for common ground in debates.

      • Dennis Frank 5.1.1

        Yes, likewise. Ghetto-ization of political discourse is an unhelpful trend, when us and them end up in separatist stances. As I pointed out during the visit by the canadian couple, no consensual definition of hate speech has yet emerged. Leftists using the concept to demonise rightists gets everyone nowhere.

        Where I do agree is instances where hate speech is used to incite violence. I gather we already have legal sanctions against such behaviour. Evidence that Tarrant did this will have to be provided for public and media discussion to make the hate-speech seem relevant in the aftermath of the massacre. Currently all we have are a bunch of leftists trying to prevent a discussion of relevant factors.

        The other key point is his online streaming of the massacre was intended for a global audience, and we lack enforceable global laws to apply to global media.

        • Incognito 5.1.1.1

          Spark spokesman Andrew Pirie said the company, Vodafone and the country’s third largest internet provider Vocus had agreed to block their customers accessing three overseas websites that would not be known to most New Zealanders but which had provided access to the video.

          Pirie said he believed New Zealand internet providers had never previously taken such a step.

          “The circumstances are such that we believe it is the responsible thing for the industry to do,” he said.

          Spark would not be blocking access to Facebook, he said, saying that would be “an extreme step” and there were other avenues to tackle the issue of footage being reposted to the platform.

          https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/111322733/facebook-battles-to-stamp-out-horror-footage-of-christchurch-shooting

          • Dennis Frank 5.1.1.1.1

            Cool, thanks. Inasmuch as his live streaming serves to glamourise violence, I see this media censorship as appropriate. I’d like to see all telecasting of glamourised violence eliminated.

            “No, no!” cry the media owners. “Viewers love that shit! We just need to censor live footage of whoever acts in accord with our programming, because they are providing proof that the indoctrination is effective.”

            • gsays 5.1.1.1.1.1

              @ Dennis: I kinda agree with your take of media owners position, if we didn’t click, stopped going to supermarkets, stopped buying 3litre vehicles, those businesses would change behaviour quick smart.

            • Incognito 5.1.1.1.1.2

              The way I see it is that laws (and censorship) are not useful in telling us how to act and or how to say things. Instead, they are outer boundaries of what society accepts in legal terms and justice is a ‘fuzzy’ concept. The answer to the age-old question “what is the right thing to do?” is not in law books nor should it be. For me, this question is inextricable linked to another one: “what is the meaning of life?”. Together, they form a useful yet incomplete framework.

              • Dennis Frank

                Very true. The spiritual view is that we incarnate to learn from experience. Apparently some experiences are pre-selected (not pre-determined). Historical rationale for karma & reincarnation is based on choice of how to respond to circumstances – but the weighting of the fate/freewill balance is culturally-determined.

                Just as rights and wrongs are! Public morality, offensive when I was young because it was based on hypocrisy, seems in a long-term process of redefinition. Inasmuch as a general reluctance to participate is apparent, one suspects the term will be very long indeed…

          • gsays 5.1.1.1.2

            @Incognito: In the past, I have often opined being against censorship.
            The example you cite, ( watch this for pin head dancing ), I concile as a business taking responsibility for its content.

            As an aside, a strangely emotional day for me, lots of belly laughs with work colleagues followed by misting up with a profound sadness.

            Had to walk away from three workmates talking excitedly about ‘a’ or ‘the’ video clip doing the rounds.

            Oops, got sidetracked….

        • WeTheBleeple 5.1.1.2

          “Currently all we have are a bunch of leftists trying to prevent a discussion of relevant factors”

          Starting to think you are a disgusting person.

          Evidence please.

          • Dennis Frank 5.1.1.2.1

            Yesterday. A couple of folks here told me off for describing the shooter’s family background. I was making the point that we need to comprehend what makes people that warped. Tim Watkin has argued similarly on Pundit. They disagreed. I find that offensive, not just imbecilic.

            If we cannot ascertain the humanity of others, we cannot solve social problems like mass shootings. Any leftist who tries to prevent public policy solutions being formulated will deserve strenuous criticism. I will help deliver it. If that disgusts you, go do some gardening…

            • WeTheBleeple 5.1.1.2.1.1

              “If we cannot ascertain the humanity of others”

              A psychopath is a psychopath. We know what occurred. A hater met a group of haters and they all encouraged each other via the products of those superstars of economic freedom – social media.

              One was crazy enough to carry thought to action.

              He’s not a cake with one bad ingredient you flakey muppet. He’s evil, pure evil.

              Maybe you’ve never had the misfortune of dealing with evil men. I’ve stepped in and stopped men with murder on their minds, and afterwards they’ve thanked me for it – temporary insanity via passion. Prison is full of over-reactions to circumstance. But then there was the guy on K-road with the big knife to his missus throat, one look in his eyes was all I needed to know to back off, and call the cops. I’ve stopped bigger men with knives, but this was no ordinary man, this was an evil prick.

              You’d do well to know the difference, or you’ll get gutted by someone you are patronising.

              “was mummy harsh, was Daddy cruel, did they beat you at your school”

              Dead.

              You’re a fucking know all yet hardly anything you say makes sense. Formulating policy from your high horse and your office, and you think I’m in the way of understanding.

              Fucking twit.

              • Dennis Frank

                So you really can’t see that you’re mouthing off just like the people you call haters? You can’t see that leftists like you are the mirror image of those they keep trying to demonise??

                Policy formulation requires us to sideline both bunches of sociopaths. Policy must work for the common good. Try growing up.

                • WeTheBleeple

                  I see. I mouth off and you discuss, you are reasonable and I am not. I get passionate so discount what I say while you never insult anyone just play the victim card.

                  You spout shit from books and I spout shit from life. You have some background papers in psychology (I’d fucken hope), I have 50 years Aspergers making it necessary to study human psychology and behavior just to fit in.

                  I have spent considerable time on the fringes of society, seven years on the streets, two jail sentences for weed, one for mushrooms, a rehab… (misdiagnosis by twats like you). I’ve spent years touring small towns and drinking into the night with the locals and I have a vague idea of who’s out there. People trust artists for some reason, it all comes out.

                  I’ve also worked in many fields and met the folks within.

                  Am I really just throwing obstruction in the face of your good works. Or do I know a whole lot of shit your pampered ass has no idea about.

                  “This is not the time for old white guys telling us what to do”.

                  Your concept you are now repeating in HTGT of taking the Islamic text to task shows how very little you know, how your context is all about shifting blame. You are an ignorant old white man and should stand the fuck down.

            • greywarshark 5.1.1.2.1.2

              DF
              I think that WtB is concerned that the PC gathering will wring their hands just when they need to be clear and take action that the actions that are unequivocal are recognised as coming from a sick mind. It is possible that the sick mind is diseased beyond change. It may be that the only way that this can be controlled is to keep someone locked away for ever.
              Or give them the Clockwork Orange treatment. That story would enlighten thinking about this situation. A diseased mind was put through a rethinking program so that the thought of violence made him sick. The public did a flip and decided emotionally to step back from his re-education. His parents even did not like his new persona; he seemed weak, not the strong young male with aggro they were used to.

              Policies have to bear in mind how warped people are who have stepped over the line of acceptable behaviour in our society. They may never be right again. Just shutting them up for a number of years and giving them credits for not getting into trouble and being a ‘model’ prisoner is bloody meaningless. The core of their being may still be the same, sitting inside their heads. They are turned loose if they seem to have improved and the public have no security, it speeds up the lack of trust that we now feel when meeting strangers, and even as we get to know people better. One has to assess what their inner feelings and biases are. So policies have to change for the control of the evil and the violent and the dangerous mad. The suggestion has been made that we should have levels of murder. For some there should be a decision made that the person has such a diseased mind pushing him to vicious or bad acts that require sequestration from the public for ever.

              No death penalty – so what? Lifelong imprisonment; operation on their brains in the part where there impulses and prejudiced emotions live?

              We have to face up to the fact that we have enabled the deterioration of our planet and our wellbeing. That will continue. We have to cope with harder times, and try to limit the things that will take us further down. And that includes the stupid way we run our prisons, longer sentences for people all the time who have done small infractions, letting out the vicious ready to have another go at their obsession or favourite target.

              • Dennis Frank

                His reaction to what I wrote proves he gets off on being abusive. Otherwise he would discuss the issues instead of firing abuse at me, right? He thinks firing abuse instead of bullets makes him a good guy. 🙄

                To recycle the title of this topic, the trouble with hate speech is that it induces a pathology in the user. His usage reveals that he is in denial of this.

                • WeTheBleeple

                  No, I walked away from this to breathe and now I’m back. You keep attacking my personality not answering the challenge that you are an ignorant knowall.

                  And yes, I swear a lot. What a sad card to play.

                  Your reaction to a white supremacist terrorist and all the horror he brought was to suggest the Muslim text is to blame.

                  What a piece of shit. No question at all now. I never engaged you for months cos you seem to talk circles and out both sides of your mouth.

                  I’ve clocked you now. I’m sure I’ve made it quite clear. You are two faced mealy mouthed and repulsive.

      • greywarshark 5.1.2

        If SM didn’t like me complaining about using the ‘c’ word then I think that shows something that we all have to acquire, and that is a sense of balance and an understanding of how others feel, why, and have more consideration for what is reasonable.

        It might necessitate breaking with some approaches. Some people are very purse-lipped and set dainty standards that hardly accept swear words.
        When I noticed how many schoolboys used fuck as their go-to adjective I decided there was a change in style and now I swear more often. I tend to use it as an
        exhortation or such. But never ‘m…fucker’… as I think that is a despicable word that strikes at the heart of morals and relationships that most hold dear and sacrosanct.

    • marty mars 5.2

      I understand and wish you well.

      And yes I’m sure white supremacists can’t even conceive that what they say is hate speech. They are protecting their perceived colour. And once ingrained they can’t change. Side note here – I just watched ‘behind the curve’ on Netflix about flat earthers. Most important bit right near the end for me. As members of a subculture they are isolated in society and find fraternity with people who believe what they believe. If they change what they think they have nothing.

      • Stunned mullet 5.2.1

        I going to break my promise not to post again just this once Marty to ask you to watch afterlife on Netflix written by Ricky Gervais – equal parts harrowing, beautiful, funny and finally uplifting.

        [lprent: Corrected the ’email’ address ]

        • marty mars 5.2.1.1

          On your recommendation I will. I was a bit scared of it tbh.

          • opium 5.2.1.1.1

            Just finished watching it last night.I also recommend it.I often find Ricky Gervais a bit much but he was very good in this.

            • I feel love 5.2.1.1.1.1

              It had a few laughs but it’s pretty shallow, and no one else gets to say anything but Gervais. As someone that has grieved a long term partner I found the ending unrealistic and stupidly unbelievable. Just a little disappointed.

              The flat earth thing was fascinating, def recommend that, and Juanita which is a bit more satisfying than the Gervais thing in my opinion anyway.

    • Cinny 5.3

      Take care SM, am sorry if I said anything that offended. Will miss your wisdom.

    • cleangreen 5.4

      Stunned Mullet,

      Although we have crossed swords now and then, I would like you to stay with us as you do offer another view that is thought provoking, so do reconsider ending and keep up blogs as we help others through this all.

  6. One Two 6

    Commentators who regularly engage in angry, abusive, insulting diatribes against others, then express emotive forms of ‘outrage and concern at events such as in ChCh…are also example…

    Regularly posting links, highlighting local and global negativity 24/7…media outlets enforcing and re-enforcing nagative messaging…

    ‘The trouble’ is…

    Forms of aggressive and violent speech won’t and can’t be magic’d away…as thoughts, ideas, beliefs etc are seemingly designed into the documented history of our species…it becomes what ‘we’ are…

    But each and every human being has the capability to change, to unlearn and to essentially alter thought and behavioural patterns…

    Each and every one of ‘us’…decides which form of energy dominates planet earth…

    Using thoughts and actions…

  7. Macro 7

    Mickey, I came across this article a couple of days ago and was looking for a suitable platform to raise it. I believe it promotes much of what you espouse to above. The Case Against Free SpeechIt is by an Brian Leiter, a philosophy Professor at the University of Chicago.
    Here is the Abstract of the Article – published in the Sydney Law Review.

    Free societies employ a variety of institutions — including courts and schools — in which speech is heavily regulated on the basis of its content (and with regard to the cognitive infirmities of listeners) in order to promote other desirable ends, including discovery of the truth. I illustrate this with the case of courts and rules of evidence. Three differences between courts and the polity at large might seem to counsel, of course, against extending that approach more widely. First, the courtroom has an official and somewhat reliable (as well as reviewable) arbiter of the epistemic merits, while the polity may not. Second, no other non-epistemic values of speech are at stake in the courtroom, whereas they are in the polity. Third, the courtroom’s jurisdiction is temporally limited in a way the polity’s may not be. I argue that only the first of these — the “Problem of the Epistemic Arbiter” as I call it — poses a serious worry about speech regulation outside select institutions like courts. I also argue for viewing “freedom of speech” like “freedom of action”: speech, like everything else human beings do, can be for good or ill, benign or harmful, constructive or pernicious, and thus the central question in free speech jurisprudence should really be how to regulate speech effectively — to minimize its very real harms, without undue cost to its positive values — rather than rationalizing (often fancifully) the supposed special value of speech. In particular, I argue against autonomy-based defenses of a robust free speech principle. I conclude that the central issue in free speech jurisprudence is not about speech but about institutional competence; I offer some reasons — from the Marxist “left” and the public choice “right”— for being skeptical that capitalist democracies have the requisite competence; and make some suggestive but inconclusive remarks about how these defects might be remedied.

    my bold
    For those who wish to examine the argument more fully I refer them to the article in Vox
    https://www.vox.com/2019/3/4/18197209/free-speech-philosophy-politics-brian-leiter

    In a nutshell we need to be constantly aware of the old maxim

    The pen is mightier than the sword

    And always remember that the pen can be used for good or bad.

    • One Two 7.1

      Macro, that angle has been pushed around…it is unworkable…I’m sure you can identity reasons why…

      Belief that regressive and punitive type force will alter hearts and minds of human beings with tendencies, towards such acts…is archaic…

      It won’t work…history illustrates the failed outcome of censorship via forced speech…or force used to prevent speech…

      Fear and regressive thoughts/actions are highly undesirable …

      Except to those types who are attracted towards regressive actions…which in turn lead to regressive outcomes and consequences…

  8. SPC 8

    The terrorist claims his purpose is to provoke a reaction by Moslems which will increase domestic opposition to immigration by Moslems.

    Given Islamists attacks in Europe were/are of a design to foster a sense of oppression of the Moslem community by western governments (in their response to terrorism) his real purpose maybe to provoke a crackdown of social media use by white race groups to drive them underground and or radicalise them. Already there are calls to regard these groups the same as Islamist ones who have been barred from social media.

    • McFlock 8.1

      They should be treated exactly the same as any other terrorist group. The bullets don’t care who pulled the trigger.

      Nazis were killing people before Qutb was putting together his ouvre. They’re the original Big Bad.

      Decades ago I heard a story that people who took Mein Kampf out from the library were looked at by the SIS. This is not a bad idea, updated for the information age.

      • Macro 8.1.1

        Further to this I came across this excellent article on Vox
        https://www.vox.com/identities/2019/3/15/18267163/new-zealand-shooting-christchurch-white-nationalism-racism-language
        “The same language featured in the alleged gunman’s manifesto is seen in white nationalist writings and outlets around the world.”

        The reason it’s important to both understand the Christchurch shooter’s manifesto and refuse to spread its contents without context is that a manifesto is a published and public declaration of intent or belief — and the critical term to remember is “public.” The Christchurch shooter wrote his manifesto with the clear intention of it being shared widely after he committed an act of mass murder.

        That means that historically, terrorist manifestos have never been accurate documentation of either their belief system or the planning that went into their attacks. The main intention of terrorist manifestos is not to help everyday people understand how they became terrorists — it is to create new terrorists.

        Mein Kampf was Hitler’s manifesto.
        Tarrant refers to a number of previous RW terrorists in his rant. and his gun had the number “14” painted on it.

        David Lane, a white supremacist responsible for the murder of a Jewish radio host in 1984, wrote the “White Genocide Manifesto” while in prison, arguing that “‘racial integration’ is only a euphemism for genocide.” He later shortened his three-page manifesto to 14 words: “We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children.” Three decades later, the term “white genocide” is the single most popular hashtag used by white nationalists on Twitter.

        • SPC 8.1.1.1

          Sure, which is why the message the terrorist sends should not be taken at face value. It’s propaganda – it’s purpose is to incite further attacks on Moslems, not response by Moslems (apart from paranoia about their safety at mosques).

        • Sabine 8.1.1.2

          and more people should have read it.

          • Sabine 8.1.1.2.1

            “Mein Kampf was Hitler’s manifesto.”

            and the Germans at the time should have read his manifesto as it was his blue print. And it should not be forgotten that he implemented quite a few things he wrote about . No could have would have should have he did.

            We need to figure out why a young white healthy man decided it was ok to go to a place of worship and mow down people, live streamed to 4/8chan, twitter and shit.
            We would want to know how he could have spoken about it on various platforms without ever irking the 5 eyes of life, how people knew when to go online to watch a snuff movie.
            We would want to know if others are planning the same.
            We would want to know why he could believe that he was gonna be ‘replaced’.

            This terrorism is us, from us, against us. there is no difference between this guy and any other guy on this planet that goes out to kill the ‘other’. None. So we should demand answers, don’t have the debate hushed as in the States Mass Shootings are hushed ‘ don’t politicize it’, heck, let us politicize it and talk about what happened, why it happened and if it were to happen again.

            So we need to read that darn thing.

      • SPC 8.1.2

        One can assume that those nationalist social media platforms that support violence will be taken down as Islamist ones were.

        Placing Moslems, or white race nationalist group members more generally under surveillance is a rather blunt methodology for dealing with terrorist threats.

        An internet activity check of those who seek (when), or already have (annually), a gun licence is security 101. This covers the lone individual threats. As would an extension of this to those with gun handling ability/training – those who could utilise stolen weapons.

        On point, part of the extremists sales pitch is their resort to violent resistance to the threat they declare. Their action is part of a rejection of government as providing for the security of the (white race) nation, thus their hope is that any subsequent government crackdown of white race groups is going to be seen as both a persecution of them and a “liberal” neglect of national security.

        The intent is not just to incite further violence against Moslems, but to mobilise increased political support. Noting the pro Serbian sentiment and visits to Bulgaria and Hungary, it all fits in with Russian efforts to use race and religious nationalism to undermine western unity.

        • McFlock 8.1.2.1

          Islamic totalitarians are to “Moslims” what “white race nationalist group members” are to everyday white middle class NZ.

          Dunno about putting any blame at the door of the Russians on this one, though.

          • SPC 8.1.2.1.1

            The Putin regime has reinvented Russia as a white race and Christian nation, and thus as a natural leader of such movements, as it once did for the left in former Communist Party rule times.

            • McFlock 8.1.2.1.1.1

              I just think that’s still a long bow to draw at this stage. Might change if more comes out on who he met in Eastern Europe, but at this stage…

              • SPC

                A direct link to Russia to him is very unlikely, just that his travels here are indicative of being part of the nationalist cause they are cultivating as part of sustaining their leadership pretensions in this part of Europe.

                Iran does something similar in the ME, posing as a leader of the resistance to the US-Israel axis in the ME.

            • reason 8.1.2.1.1.2

              I’m calling bullshit on your white russian Putin hate post SPC …

              I think Khabib …. a wildly popular Muslim who is proud to represent Russia … tells us your white russian barrow you are pushing is full of crap. https://gulfnews.com/sport/khabib-100-times-bigger-than-mo-salah-after-winning-the-muslim-world-1.2288059

              You should take up dancing or something SPC …. enjoy something healthy

  9. greywarshark 9

    Just thinking about ways of coping with people like Tarrant and the hate-bunch. As far as Tarrant is concerned I was thinking of shipping him back to Oz pretty soon would be good.after a bit of genuine solitary jail time. Then I thought that Oz would either let him go or just hold him in jail and that would leave him unchanged and possibly in line to commit more attacks. I thought of of another way.

    If the Muslim leaders and congregation agreed, what about him being in solitary in NZ, Christchurch, with a daily session with different leaders quietly asking him why. Asking him what had been done to him to make him turn on them. All the questions that would go deep into his heart and thinking. Let a Stockholm situation arise between them. It would be no use raging at him, that is what he has built himself up to deflect.

    It’s getting at the painful core of whatever has happened to this type of person. Getting down to that and him iving through talking about it could lead him feeling cleansed of the sadness. Or it would at least take the scab off. And he should be treated as a depressed person who has dangerous impulses, with care and safety for him and jailers in mind.

    I don’t know if this has been done anywhere; little one thinks of is original. But it possibly has never been done in NZ. If it works, it would be better if he could be kept out of mainstream jail so that he could get to the stage where he has recovered a resilient persona and he may then feel like writing a letter expressing his sorrow and what he was thinking to carry out this. Also a brief sorry to the congregation would help heal some of their hurt. If that worked that far it would be a step forward.

    • Muttonbird 9.1

      Tarrant must stay here for the rest of his life.

      Life without parole in Christchurch Men’s but limited and monitored time with other prisoners. This is not a nice prison from what I’ve heard. He’ll be wanting all sorts of access to reading material both hard copy and online. Restrict his reading to hard copy only and absolutely no internet access for the rest of his life. No visitors outside immediate family and no material to be distributed by him whatsoever. Definitely no media interviews.

      Then, send a monthly invoice for his incarceration to the Australian government for the remainder of his days.

      • Macro 9.1.1

        Better still – deport him to Australia. They have a few serco prisons over there which I understand are right up there with the very nastiest.

        • Muttonbird 9.1.1.1

          The worse the better (oxymoron!) but New Zealand would lose a lot of control over his incarceration and it’s not like Australia listen to our concerns much anyway.

          I do hear what you are saying about Australia being a more penal state than NZ and they will be desperately embarrassed by this mass murderer.

        • Sabine 9.1.1.2

          Have him serve his time in prison here,

          and deport his arse back to OZ. indeed.

          they can decide if they want to take the risk of him shooting up more people or not.

          • greywarshark 9.1.1.2.1

            Sabine
            The trouble with sending Tarrant back now or later to Oz is that he is free to come back here because we have no visa system.

            Oz made it an excuse to be tough on Kiwis because too many from here got into there on our no-visa system. They said it was a back door for entry who wouldn’t have got in if they had applied directly to Oz.

            Well now is the time to introduce visas and cut out entry of undesirables from either country. Then Oz needs to stop coming down on NZs who are now Australians. We will have to watch that NZ-Aussies aren’t denied return when they want to go home of course. At present Oz is forcing them out of Oz and away from their homes and family; a new form of statelessness.

            We have too many tourists here, can’t cope now. So that would cut out some of the cheaper Aussies and we can scrutinise and control the entries.
            And some NZs might like to go to some of the Pacific Islands instead of making Oz a default destination. The Islands could do with our $s. Business people can have specially issued visas, so it wouldn’t limit their travel arrangements.

      • greywarshark 9.1.2

        I’m looking at finding out what we can do to improve the mindset of the difficult prisoners like Tarrant. We have been shoving them away in prison for yonks and it only serves a purpose if the nasties stay there for ever. If nothing serious is tried we let down the citizens, if they come out worse than they went in.
        And the prison workers if they get attacked because we didn’t try teaching methods of control over reaction.

        There is no guarantee that someone given re-education treatment will truly change, but a modern government would try after consulting with people knowledgable in mind change with academic qualifications, and not from religious POV. At the least it might save wardens being attacked, and other prisoners

        • Muttonbird 9.1.2.1

          There is no improving the mindset of prisoners like Tarrant. They are not able to be made safe. He will ask for material with which to continue his crusade, and that’s what it is – a crusade in the name of those crusades popular 1000 years ago. He must be denied any and every opportunity to speak his views for the rest of his short life.

          • WeTheBleeple 9.1.2.1.1

            Agreed. This guy is gone-burger. No redemption. Even if he came to grips with what he did, he’d then be nothing but shame. The weight of his own actions would soon see him again trying to shift blame for them.

            There’s a time to be a snowflake. And a time to pour cold water on the aspirations of assholes.

            There is no redemption for this prick. I’ve been locked up with evil men. Some men love being evil because they are ultimately broken. The eventual realization of what he did will leave nothing of value.

            Alternately, some men realize what they did was wrong almost immediately. He is not one of them.

    • Dennis Frank 9.2

      Talk therapy has been a profession awhile. One of my long-term partners was trained in psychosynthesis, did sex-abuse counselling almost two decades, was coordinator of the Auckland Help operation a couple of years too. The impression I got was that victims get helped – but I’m sceptical help is effective for offenders.

      Notice how we never get rehabilitation stats in media discussions? Tacit indicator that they are too low to cite, methinks. I do agree it would be worth a try though.

      Main problem would be ideology. Eliminating it from the psyche of a true-believer isn’t as easy as replacing the operating system of a computer. It would first require psychotherapists to develop the expertise to become effective in belief-system replacement. As far as I can tell, they haven’t even started.

      • greywarshark 9.2.1

        DF
        Interesting. I think it worth a try and it would give the younger Muslims a chance to see this guy face to face and get him to spew his hate out, if they can stand it. And it might take the toxicity down a few notches. But it definitely would need a professional guiding the whole thing. Strict time limits on each side I think.

        • mpledger 9.2.1.1

          They tried this with sex offenders – sexual abuse victims came in and talked about the abuse and it’s effects on them but the sex offenders just got their thrills over the abuse part and the effects part went over their heads. They didn’t have the social and emotional maturity to get it.

      • Gabby 9.2.2

        Do you consider Shatpant a suitable candidate for this praxis franky?

  10. florabunda 10

    NZ has it’s own ‘political commentators’ fomenting ill-will and paranoia, undermining the democratic process, and discouraging useful, respectful debate on important issues.
    Hosking, Soper, Garner and company, just perhaps they will take heed and consider what their strident scorn and unpleasantness creates. Their’s is an abuse of power, they are culpable and a disgrace.

    • Sabine 10.1

      It is the Rush Limboughication of TV/Radio Opinion.

      daily opinion pieces were something i loved to watch. After the news there was the editor of both a left and right newspaper and both pontificated about the day passed.
      They generally were nice and well phrased editorials to the days.
      now a days? Can’t turn on the tv or the radio because all you have is self absorbed gasbags blowing out hot air. And this they do very noisily.

  11. adam 11

    We need to own up to the fact this medium is fraught with problems.

    We have a tendency – because we can’t see the person, we can not gauge what they say with the help of body language, nor their tone to get a clear picture of meaning. We are constantly confronted with people who read too much, or too little in what you write.

    I say this being one of the people who gets the wrong end of the stick, all the time. I’m bad, as I think marty mars and others would attest to.

    The medium, this form of discussion is always going to have these flaws.

    But, it was not hate speech yesterday. It was a well organised and well funded cell of white supremacists intent on murder. They are not alone. They are NOT the only ones. This country is full of far right groups hell bent on using political violence to push their agenda forward. The longer we bury our heads in the sand, and think this is not the case then the more murder, and political violence will become the norm.

    • marty mars 11.1

      Yes adam and I’m as bad as you – made many apologies here to people I’ve been rude to.

      I also agree that out there right now there are white supremacists drinking a beer and raising it to the murderer. And there will be others pissed off that they didn’t do it and get the attention. We are in a dangerous time where copycats cannot be discounted. This white supremacist is the tip of the dirty iceberg of race hate and intolerance in this country.

      We tolerate hate speech and when the people being hated on say it is hate speech and they want it stopped some people go no it isn’t. Those people need to fucken wake up!

      • adam 11.1.1

        “This white supremacist is the tip of the dirty iceberg of race hate and intolerance in this country.”

        Never a more poignant sentence written on the standard (IMHO).

        Well said marty mars, and thanks for saying it.

  12. McFlock 12

    There’s a tweet going around with a photo of that nice personal development guru with a fan, apparently in NZ.

    The fan is wearing a “proud islamophobe” tshirt.

    • Muttonbird 12.1

      Whaaat!

    • marty mars 12.2

      fuck me, unbelievable

      there won’t be any accountability from that prick or his equally prickified followers on this site and in this country.

    • Gabby 12.3

      I wonder if the police will bother finding out who he is.

    • Sam 12.4

      Quit being paranoid and narcissistic. Peterson does a lot of good and if you want to bring him down you better try harder than that.

      • McFlock 12.4.1

        Peterson is also happy to make fucking racists feel normal and acceptable. That is what he is doing in that photo.

        Any non-fuckwit would have refused to pose with anyone wearing a shirt like that, and any fuckwit who made their living mostly from groups that didn’t think racism and xenophobia were normal would have refused to be seen associating with branding like that.

        Or are you suggesting Peterson can’t read?

        Please give an explanation where Peterson comes out of that photo as a non-fuckwit.

        • Muttonbird 12.4.1.1

          This. Sam, you could be a good commenter here but not if you can’t or won’t recognise Peterson’s many, many faults.

          • Sam 12.4.1.1.1

            I estimate Peterson’s net worth to be above $50 million. He had law suits trying to take his university salary away and that worked, kind of. I just couldn’t imagine away of you taking Peterson’s other revenue streams away. The book deals, gate fees, ect. People actually want to see him because he gives them new meaning to there lives. Peterson fans are smart and well off and they won’t be pulled to a side that is less smart and less well off.

        • RedLogix 12.4.1.2

          Please give an explanation where Peterson comes out of that photo as a non-fuckwit.

          Because it is just one photo taken with one person out of maybe thousands of others; it no more necessarily represents the whole of his views, than would the sum of all the views of all the other people he meets. The T-Shirt represents what the person wearing it wants to project, not anyone else.

          As a counter example, today there are media pictures of Adern wearing a simple headscarf while attending an event; does this mean she is now identifies as a radical Muslim who secretly yearns to run away and join ISIS? Of course not, all it means is she was expressing a human solidarity with a group of fellow New Zealanders at a moment of intense loss. There is no need to read more into the moment than this.

          From what I’ve seen of Peterson, he’s openly scathing of radical, totalitarian ideologies both left and right, but very compassionate towards individuals looking to crawl out of the various messes they’ve made of their lives.

          • marty mars 12.4.1.2.1

            Bullshit – he’s standing there with his fucking arm around him. You are one of his strongest supporters on here – always putting shit up in support of him. And don’t fucken dare bring Jacinda into your pathetic defense of that prick.

            • Sam 12.4.1.2.1.1

              Well I’m the last to defend Peterson, that said. if I only look at the picture and the nice political caption that accompanies it then I would only see the picture and the words and nothing else. I would have also missed everything that’s going on around them. Outside of the picture frame is life where really hard decisions have to made. Let’s say Peterson does start excluding paying customers. That would make them a target, and it would radicalise fairly well off and largely white people even faster. And you don’t want that.

              • marty mars

                Piss off spam I’m not interested in hearing your bullshit. I’m talking to red.

                • Sam

                  This thread starts it off with a “be respectful” then straight away Lprint the founder of this site is disrespectful, consistently, hasn’t got a coherent argument at all. And now Marty Mars has lost the plot. Moderators tell me what to do on here all the time and Marty reckons he can now tell me what to do. Amazing.

              • Gabby

                You appear to be the first person to defend Pedyson sambam.

              • McFlock

                Well I’m the last to defend Peterson

                lol going by the replies, you were literally the first to defend Peterson.

                Snap gabby – sorry didn’t read through the thread. Long day.

                • Sam

                  That’s a strange thing to say. I literally make a comment about openness and “Diversity” then get disrespected by printer and now your trying to claim that I’m with Peterson who is a well known anti-diversity well at least when it comes to radical leftists. You lot are unbelievable.

                  Now I’m really curious to know if any ones checked on Bastard.

                  • McFlock

                    No dude, it’s just a funny observation. You started by saying you’re the last person to defend something that, actually, you were the first one to defend.

                    And all someone could have said was “not in that shirt”. Problem solved. But nobody thought to.

                    “checked on Bastard”? Draco? Wassup with dtb?

                    • Sam

                      No, no, no. I started out by making an argument for waking up from the war on terror which offended printer for some unknown reason, Unknown because he started writing curses. You’d be aware of that if he hadn’t used his mod powers to censor me all day.

                      Idk what’s up with Drako. He used to be such a prolific commenter it’s weird not having him @me about capitalism. Bit weird.

                    • McFlock

                      “printer”? You mean LPrent?

                      Pick a fight with the sysadmin, you’re lucky to just be in moderation. As you might find out, commenters come and go for many reasons. some of us even occasionally get a life and stop permanently. 🙂

                      But look at the comment thread from the pic of Peterson with the Islamophobe. You were the first to defend him, no?

                    • Sam

                      Was pointing out that accusing Peterosns followers of being racists pushes even more people who don’t consider themselves racist towards Peterson. What you saw I can only guess.

                    • McFlock

                      I saw Peterson posing in a photo with a guy who literally labelled himself as an “Islamophobe”, which I gather might be regarded as a form of racism.

                    • Sam

                      If I had the choice between you doing your thing on the guy and Peterson, I’d choose Peterson. And that’s that.

                    • McFlock

                      what, not even suggested he put on a coat?

                    • Sam

                      Only if the customer / client is offended or if it’s a family freindly event do you tell staff to cover up. Peterson is neither a customer / client nor does Peterson have the authority to tell the guy in the photo what to wear, because the guy is the paying customer and Peterson is performing for his money. It’s almost amazing how he attracts people with his words to his payment systems. It’s so elegant to me, you may not understand the dark arts of finance. Peterson kind of reminds me of that machine in the Tom Hanks flick BIG. Y’know it’s an amazing machine but there’s something not quite right because people dont normally plan in a linear or logical way.

                      Otherwise it’s a legal matter and not a matter of street justice.

                    • mpledger

                      Peterson doesn’t have to do anything.

                      No matter how much money, no matter what is in his contract.

                      He doesn’t have to do a darn thing.

                      There maybe consequences for not doing a darn thing – he may have to weigh up hurting someones feelings, he may have to weigh turning a person away, he may have to weigh up going against a contract if that contract says he has no control over who he is photographed with (however unlikely that is)

                      but there are also consequences for doing that thing. And being photographed with a someone with such a shirt on speaks volumes and has consequences.

                    • Sam

                      I don’t think so. The consequences for being impolite is greater> than being polite. Of course, I could be way off the mark here.

            • RedLogix 12.4.1.2.1.2

              It’s my understanding that after all his events there will be several hundred such brief meetings and photos similar to this pose.

              If you want to improve the lives of people, every clinician knows that you don’t start by rejecting them and making hurtful judgements. You start with where they are at, and encourage them to find a path out of their mire.

              I recall that you once said you worked in or around the mental health sector IIRC. Surely this idea is familiar to you?

              • marty mars

                Lol that’s the defense. So weak red so weak. The photo of the 2 scum is there for all to see. He won’t be fucking coming here again I promise you that.

                • I know I’d never be in a photo with someone wearing a tee shirt with that message on it.

                  I’d probably punch that nazi, or at the very least, tell him fuck off and stop ruining my photo ops.

                  • RedLogix

                    Sighs. Yes in the context of Christchurch you may well be right. But in the wider context of say:

                    https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/06/21/un-panel-reports-isis-crimes-yezidis

                    https://edition.cnn.com/2014/11/14/world/meast/isis-war-crimes/index.html

                    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2719991/Horrific-new-photographs-ISIS-atrocities-prompted-Obama-act.html

                    then maybe it looks a little different. Indeed Islamic fundamentalist terrorism in recent times in total looks at least several orders of magnitude worse than Christchurch.

                    One atrocity never justifies another, therein lies the path of the madness we saw in say Yugoslavia. But this stupid T-shirt didn’t happen in a vacuum either.

                    My personal position is simple and consistent all along; I strongly condemn extremist ideologies of all kinds. Not just on theoretical grounds, but because I have encountered more than a few in my life face to face. Much to my enduring dismay.

                    • No, under any circumstance, I would never have my picture taken with someone wearing a hate speech slogan on their chest.

                      You can sigh as much as you like, as is your wont, but I know I would challenge that at face to face level and end up a winner.
                      This isn’t a reaction to CHCH, it’s a moral obligation.
                      The suit in the photo failed.

                    • RedLogix

                      Well there is the point Incognito makes below, and I also had in mind the Labour MP who got burned for a similar pic with a Chinese businessman some years back. People read way too much into photos like this.

                      Look I get it, your response to this stupid T-shirt is to punch the wearer of it. Although I can’t see what your defense in principle would be if he punched you back. As I hinted above, I have every personal reason to loath and fear extremists like him, so I’m not unsympathetic to how you feel.

                      Peterson is taking a different approach here, one that is consistent with his clinical experience, and something like ‘hate the sin, love the sinner’. And arguably he’s getting better results than you are.

                    • It’s not a macho fist thing, it’s all on principle.
                      Someone tells me a racist joke, I tell them to fuck off.
                      Someone slags off ethnic minorities in my presence, I tell them they’re intellectually retarded, and to then fuck off.

                      No respectable person would take a photo op with a hate speech slogan wearing moron. Full stop.

                      Peterson fails my good character test. It’s a shame he doesn’t yours, but then that’s life – Different strokes and all that.

                    • RedLogix

                      I tell them they’re intellectually retarded, and to then fuck off.

                      And how well does all that work? I mean it must make you feel virtuous and all that, but do you think it changes anything for the better?

                    • I’m not sure I’m virtuous because of it, but I feel I’m in touch with my humanity, if that helps you reconcile my stance against outward haters.

                      Whether it helps, or not, I couldn’t say, but I know there’d be one less photo of a nutbar next to a nazi for his sympathisers to jizz over.

                    • McFlock

                      do you think it changes anything for the better?

                      While I like to think I’d avoid the R-word, fuck yes it makes things better. It shows the fuckwit and any victimised person in the area that the fuckwit does not have the tacit approval of others. That this shit should never be normal, but always aberrant and abhorrent. Never under-estimate that as a public service.

                    • RedLogix

                      And humans have been reacting exactly as you have for all of our ancient history; it’s why history is such bloody reading. It’s an instinct that serves us well when faced with dangerous and immediate predators, but like so many instincts it serves less well when faced with the complexity of our social lives.

                      In my working life I’ve met many, many people with ideas and attitudes I didn’t much like. And for a very long time I tended to shun them. But they’re no fools, they could read me, and they responded accordingly. It made working with them difficult, any trust was fragile or tainted with envy or suspicion.

                      In the past four years it occurred to me I might try something different; instead of shunning them, or trying to ‘intellectually punch’ them with my superior argument … I started to pay attention to them instead. All those courses where I got told about ‘listening skills’ I slowly started putting into action. Instead of reacting to their ideas, I tried connecting with the person.

                      And every time, without exception, they surprised me with their stories and their lives. As I write this I’m thinking especially of one person whose relationship with me went from frank hostility to us hugging sincerely when he left site. It doesn’t always work, and I’m prone to messing it up still. But it’s progress of sorts I think.

                    • McFlock

                      So how many racists have you stopped being racist?

                    • Well, while you “might try something different; instead of shunning them, or trying to ‘intellectually punch’ them with my superior argument … I started to pay attention to them”, I prefer to nip that sort of shit in the bud and deny them the courtesy of rational debate.

                      You wear a ‘proud islamaphobe’ tee shirt and want to have your photo taken with me, it’s not gonna happen. I’m better than that.
                      I don’t want to hear your argument, your defence, your justification. I immediately think you’re a cunt, and doubt there’s anything you can say that will change my opinion of you.

                      I don’t get your position at all.

                    • RedLogix

                      So how many racists have you stopped being racist?

                      If I thought you were asking that in good faith I might attempt an answer. But of course I cannot tell, only they might speak for themselves.

                      A more useful question might be, how do you transform the human heart? In all the ugly confrontations you and I have seen, even just here at TS, did you ever see any good come of it?

                      Yet all the sages and wisdom of the ages tell us the path lies in in the other direction:

                      https://www.biblehub.com/matthew/5-44.htm

                    • RedLogix

                      @ Al1en

                      I don’t get your position at all.

                      Look back into your own life, right back as a child even, and think of all the stupid, wrong or just plain inadequate ideas you have clung to … even if it was just Santa Claus. Yet with time you changed and you moved on, leaving behind those mistakes. The idea was not you, in a very important way, we all transcend the mere ideas and imaginings we entertain on our path through life.

                      Try seeing the person and their idea as different things.

                    • McFlock

                      At TS? Have you been applying your heightened understanding skills here, too, on e.g. gender issues?

                      Thing about TS is that the real jerks get moderated out. Self-solving problem.

                      As for transforming the human heart, bigger job than for me. But I’d be happy not to lend some fuckwits a sense of legitimacy and acceptance.

                    • How does looking back on my life correct Peterson from having his photo taken with a racist? Even if my mortgage depended on it, I wouldn’t have ever consented to that photo.
                      Stop mitigating away that historic error of judgement.

                    • RedLogix

                      Thing about TS is that the real jerks get moderated out.

                      I accept in the context of maintaining collective hygiene we have to do some housekeeping from time to time; hell I did it myself for years.

                      But I never kidded myself that bans ever changed anyone, they just went away and were jerks elsewhere.

                    • McFlock

                      I’m no missionary out to save souls. As long as they can’t do too much damage, I’m cool with them being jerks elsewhere. Preferably prison, if they’re major jerks. Just keep them away from guns.

                    • RedLogix

                      I’m no missionary out to save souls.

                      Fair enough, although if you’re not in some way aiming at leaving the world a better place, I can’t see how you can justify complaining about it.

                    • McFlock

                      I do my part. But fuck those guys.

                  • RedLogix

                    @ Al1en

                    Were you ever wrong about something? Ever? Have you changed your understanding over the years? Unless you are claiming omniscience then of course you have. All human ideas are limited and fallible.

                    Yet another part of you remains you, it’s your consciousness and sense of will that accompanies you unchanged through the course of your life. This is why the person, that part of us which reflects in some small way our divine essence, is not the same as the the ideas which possess us at any given moment.

                    All I’m saying is that when I stop reacting to the stupid T-shirt, and pay attention to the real person underneath it, there is often someone quite different waiting to come out and play.

                    Night.

                    • Of course I’ve been wrong, who hasn’t, but I’ve never had a photo taken with a cunt wearing a proud islamaphobe tee shirt.

                      You’re in the wrong trying to minimise the effect that has on Peterson. He allowed it to happen. I wouldn’t have.

                      Would you let yourself be photographed next to that idiot?
                      Go on, say yes, and why.

                    • lolo []

                      Hmm cunt? Or perhaps ‘scotum’ might be a better word. Do you get why?

                    • RedLogix

                      On balance, yes I would have. And not because it would have been the easy thing to do.

                      But here’s the thing, by taking that risk, Peterson left the door open for this guy to keep listening to him, take responsibility for his life and move away from his frank bigotry. As many others have reported doing so.

                      Who know how it might play out, I’m only guessing. But I’m pretty certain as a strategy it’s a better bet than telling the guy he’s a cunt and punching him. Metaphorically or otherwise.

                    • marty mars

                      I think you have some sympathy for his position re Islam. Nice you are so concerned for the t shirt wearer.

                    • RedLogix

                      @ marty

                      There was a part of my life where I did have a lot more exposure to Islam than I’ve ever written about here. I’ve expanded on this just a little lower down at 3:27am.

                      IIRC there is only one clip I’ve encountered where Peterson has spoken in any detail on Islam.

                      Questioner: You put the Judaeo-Christian tradition on the one side and Islam on the other. Specifically, “the complex problem of Islam” as a “totalizing system” … at the level of psychological significance of these stories at the level of mythology and archetype, how is Islam so different from the Judaeo-Christian tradition? Because, Adam – Ādam, Eve – Ḥawwā, Satan – Shayṭān, and so on and so forth. Everything from the Fall to the Flood. A lot of what you discuss in this lecture series is necessarily a part of Islam as well … Tonight you’ve said that the moral presuppositions of a culture are substantiated in its stories. I see a lot of the same stories. So, current global affairs aside, I’m asking at the deepest level: how different are these stories and the moral presuppositions?

                      Dr. Jordan B. Peterson: Okay, well that’s a killer question. Well, okay, so the first thing I would say is that fundamentally, I don’t know … there are a couple things that I cannot wrap my head around easily with Islam. One is what I see as the failure to separate church from state, and that’s a problem … Problem number two for me – and again, this may be a consequence of my ignorance, which I am trying to rectify: Muhammad was a warlord, and I don’t know what to do about that fact … The expansion that he initiated was unbelievably successful. Within six hundred years, it was the biggest empire that the world had ever seen, and it demolished Byzantine Christianity … The Buddhists were wiped out of Afghanistan, and we saw that echoed in the Taliban’s destruction of those great Buddhist monuments. And so, what I’m hoping is that there is a bridge – there better be a bridge.[1]

                      That seems a reasonable starting point.

                    • “Hmm cunt? Or perhaps ‘scotum’ might be a better word. Do you get why?”

                      I get why you may want to substitute the c word, though as it’s usage is an historic part of my cultural identity, it may be a hard habit to break.
                      I’m not bothered by it, but feel free to use dick, dong, penis, shaft, bone, love stick, truncheon, willy or winkle in it’s place. I still won’t be offended.

                  • marty mars

                    yep as you can see from the rest of the thread like attracts like. All white supremacists are on notice now.

                    • RedLogix

                      That’s the second time you’ve made an implicit threat in this thread. You’re smart enough to wrap them in a veil of plausible deniability, but no question there is an ugly dogwhistle tilting toward violence.

                      I’ve answered all your challenges in good faith. So what do you mean by “on notice”?

                    • marty mars

                      After this terrorism by a white supremacist on innocent Muslims and the murders of 50 people we, as a country, imo will no longer tolerate white supremacist hate speech and actions. Māori have been fighting this for years. This country is changed and it’s not going back to cuddling white supremacist hate mongers. Clear enough for you. That isn’t a threat it is the new reality and i can say I’ve heard this from a lot of people of every colour.

                    • RedLogix

                      imo will no longer tolerate white supremacist hate speech and actions.

                      That’s understandable and I agree with it. For many, many years I have consistently condemned extremist ideologies of every kind, and I’ve thought it too obvious to say explicitly that the ideas driving this mass murderer in ChCh are utterly wrong at every level.

                      On reflection, in all the back and forth here, I’ve omitted to make that clear.

                      At the same time, it was oddly enough a kaumatua I knew in the 80’s, who wisely told me not to ever pretend to try and be what I was not; that I was white and never to allow myself to be shamed for that. I can still recall the precise moment and place.

                    • marty mars

                      So no threat then. Thanks for apologising for getting it wrong and maligning me. Things are different here now as you’ll find out when next you visit.

          • McFlock 12.4.1.2.2

            lots of people wear headscarves, from many cultures and religions and fashions.

            Only one type of person labels themselves like tshirt fucko did.

            At the very least, Peterson is running a business. That he and anyone in his entourage didn’t think that message might harm his business says a lot about his income stream.

            • RedLogix 12.4.1.2.2.1

              lots of people wear headscarves,

              I stand to be corrected, but today was the very first time I’ve seen Adern wear one. In the context of the event she was at it was a clear, and I should add welcome, gesture of solidarity. It meant something.

              Peterson’s a moderate right winger, I’m a moderate left winger … I don’t agree with him on many explicitly political points, but in terms of his core expertise there is a lot of common sense.

              As for Peterson’s income stream, clearly he’s not pitching at you so your response is probably not factored in. What are not hard to find are legit reports from people who say they’ve abandoned alt-right extremism because of him.

              • McFlock

                Yes, solidarity. But not with ISIS, which is who you said. Because more than one group wear headscarves, in and out of Islam.

                But only one type of person wears that shirt.

                And yeah, that’s his income stream – not me.

                • RedLogix

                  But not with ISIS, which is who you said.

                  Well that of course was my point; that such an assertion would be stupid. As is assuming that this photo necessarily any more significant.

                  • McFlock

                    The only significance of the photo is what’s in the photo – he’s happy to stand and pose with a guy in that completely unambiguous shirt.

                    Don’t go pretending that a headscarve is the same as that shirt. It’s just shy of a swastika.

                    • RedLogix

                      And a headscarf could be interpreted as just shy of a burqa … it would be a stupid case to try and make though.

                    • McFlock

                      🙄

                      Only if it was labelled “Proud almost-a-burqa” with big fucking letters. And even then, actually, no it would still just be a headscarf.

                      That shirt is unambiguous, though.

                    • RedLogix

                      Not really. There is a clear unambiguous continuity in Islamic communities around women having to ‘cover up’ in public. The expression of it ranges from simple headscarves (which as you say are scarcely a problem even in the West) to full burkas.

                      But the underlying ideology is invariant.

                      But to be clear, just because Adern chose rightly to use it as an expression of human solidarity, does not mean she’s giving a tacit dog-whistle to the kind of insanity that is ISIS and similar extremists.

                    • McFlock

                      Nuns can find head coverings quite habit-forming.

                      But jokes aside, your false equivalence between headscarves and literally labelling oneself as a racist is pretty fucked up, frankly.

                    • RedLogix

                      false equivalence between headscarves and literally labelling oneself as a racist is pretty fucked up

                      Well the same ideology that underpins headscarves and burkas, also justifies the sex slavery and genocide of ISIS. Which incidentally is one of the most truly horrendous crimes against humanity of our times, yet oddly enough all the woke lefty radicals here are almost universally silent about it.

                      So why am I not surprised it’s all ‘false equivalence’.

                      Peterson is also happy to make fucking racists feel normal and acceptable. That is what he is doing in that photo.

                      Consistently you talk about these people in prerogative terms, dehumanising them with labels and insults. Yet I share with Peterson an unshakeable belief that each one of us carries through life a spark of the divine. I chose to act as if this was true, even if I cannot prove it.

                      What I chose to do is make the person, that human being, feel normal, or at the least feel heard and listened to. It doesn’t even take much, but it opens the heart and the mind, sometimes just enough to let a chink of light in.

                      At the same time I chose not to give their unacceptable ideas any power by reacting to them. And neither does Peterson; if you spent any time at all listening to what he is saying, it’s crystal clear he is not making the racism, the hate speech or bigotry acceptable in the slightest.

                      That is the distinction; that is seems lost on you is just a little baffling really.

                    • Sam

                      Wow, hold on logix. Don’t recal the exact bit of the Quran but before King Richard the Lion Heart invaded the Middle East and crusaded every one there was something in the Quran that specifically stated that Muslims could not raise standing armies so they put in the Caliphate so they could take him on and ultimately kick out the infidels. So western ideology is not written in pure white snow. Fast forward to today and no one in the White House would admit to creating ISIS, what they did do is create the backdrop for the rise of ISIS by again, crusading every one in Saddams Iraq, making them poor, angry and again using the Quran as it was used against Richard the Lion Heart. Now that’s a distinction worth noting. We must first give the historical context and then explain the processes and functions if we are to give meaning to the psycho technologies of abstinence, religion and the burqa.

                    • RedLogix

                      It’s often a bit hard to follow you Sam; you do have an idiosyncratic mode of expression. And I’m writing specific comments here, not A Universal and Comprehensive Meaning of All History. So yes things get left out 🙂

                      The full story of Islam and especially it’s relationship with Christian Europe is extremely complex and nuanced. It’s way too late at night to even attempt the barest hint of it.

                      Both cultures influenced each other, in complex ways. In broad terms the Golden Age of Islam from roughly 670AD through 1300AD saw them expand rapidly across the Middle East and dramatically develop the most advanced and enlightened civilisation of the era.

                      In this era, many ideas flowed from Islam toward Europe, especially via Constantinople. There are many aspects of what we think of as the Western enlightenment project, which have roots in this cultural transfusion.

                      But their territorial ambitions ultimately ran afoul the two things; resistance in Christian Europe and the emergence of regressive, fundamentalist divisions and cults within Islam itself, and from about 1500AD onward their political and cultural trajectory was uniformly downward. In particular the Renaissance and Enlightenment era came and went largely without Islam’s participation.

                      And we now see echoes of the same two forces at work today, and with some parallels to the historic events leading to the extinction of Israel in the time of the Romans. Modern Islam is in trouble; it has resisted many attempts at liberalisation, at separation of state and mosque, and clings obdurately to the idea that the teachings of the Prophet are the last word of Divine Revelation for all time. Even when the modern world we live in is so very, very different to the time when the Koran was first recited.

                      Ultimately modern Islam has degenerated into a deeply intolerant and totalitarian religion, that maintains it’s grip on over 1.5 billion humans by an intense cultural matrix that brooks no apostasy. While it treats ‘non-believers’ rather like Christians tended to treat Jews, with a mix of patronising acquiescence and occasional contempt, it actively persecutes endogenous reform movements such as the Baha’i’s with unbridled viciousness.

                      The mass of believers of course live their own lives relatively detached from all of this; they too have families, mortgages, problems at work and all the same challenges any human has to face. We share far more in common with them, than not. Speaking to the structural problems of Islam, says no more about ordinary Muslims, than say the Catholic Churches obvious problems says about the mass of ordinary Catholics.

                      Most Muslims find their own way to reconcile these contradictions between the modern world and a faith firmly anchored in the past, with quiet dignity and a steady faith. We should wish them well and act in good faith toward them, even when sorely tested.

                      I’ve no idea how this story will play out, but if we step back a little, we can place Christchurch into a much larger historic narrative, that has many chapters yet to be written.

                    • Sam

                      Yeah, sounds about right. I’v kinda lost the desire to write bibles as well although every now and then I’ll go over the character limit and have to brake it down into part / chapters.

                    • Sabine

                      did the guy have to pay to have his photo taken?

                      Cause i would assume he did. After all the dude needs to make some money somehow.

                      And frankly a nun, an orthodox jewish women, an observant muslima, a sikh, an observant jewish man, wearng head gear is clearly not the same as a man wearing a t-shirt stating “i am a islamophobe’…..

                      so really does this wanker gets paid to take his picture with ‘fans’?

                    • RedLogix

                      @Sabine

                      Apparently yes. Looking at his event booking page there is a

                      Package Includes: One Premium Seat Ticket, Meet & Greet Event with Jordan Peterson, One Photo with Jordan Peterson, One Exclusive VIP Laminate

                      .

                      Outside of NZ this kind of thing is pretty common practice at a large scale event like this. With several thousand in the room, not everyone can get to meet the speaker personally, so this is the obvious and usual practice to ration the opportunity.

                      Personally I’d never pay extra for something like this, regardless of who it was. In fact we had the chance to see him in Brisbane, but neither of us felt like stumping up.

                    • Sam

                      For every unit of wealth there is at least one unit of inequality every one is willing to put up with, neither can be zero. Although there are many different ways to tide they all lead to the same economic prosperity.

                    • McFlock

                      Consistently you talk about these people in prerogative terms, dehumanising them with labels and insults. Yet I share with Peterson an unshakeable belief that each one of us carries through life a spark of the divine. I chose to act as if this was true, even if I cannot prove it.

                      Firstly, the guy in the shirt guy labelled himself. Literally. That’s not my doing. That’s not me being insulting. That’s the actual fact.

                      Secondly, not everyone who wears a headscarf shares the ideology of terrorists. But everyone who labels themselves an Islamophobe is a racist. So yes, it is a false equivalence to use one to normalise the other.

                      Thirdly, I’ve listened to more of Peterson than I’d ever want to. He’s an arrogant fool who does a good line in vague monologues with doubtful assumptions but can’t handle a serious question from someone who doesn’t regard him as a modern-day Socrates. And if he’s not making racism or bigotry acceptable “in the slightest”, why is he taking a photo with that guy like it’s just a normal tshirt?

                    • Sam

                      What’s the focus, is it a t-shirt, the writing or the person wearing said t-shirt or is the focus on you feeling good, okay? Commenting should never be a vacation from life. Commenting should always be an education about the depth of the blog and of course life. And so you should be taking instruction about the teaching of educational transformation and challenging yourself to the growth and awareness and insight that you are no doubt probably seeking.

                    • McFlock

                      You should think about whether you’re making the next “proud Islamophobe” feel validated as a normal part of society.

                    • Sam

                      What I will tell you about commenting and this is something you should be open to is your reason for getting into a debate will change as the debate goes on. You’ll go into the comments section because you’re interested in relaxing and getting more peace of mind and as you go on and discover more, then the why you’re debating will change for you. And I would recommend to you that that is also a criteria that you pay attention too. If you’re engaged in a practice and you’re not getting that sense of growth and your understanding and goals and growth aren’t deepening in the practice then there’s a chance you might want to consider where and who you are learning to practice with, my boy.

                    • McFlock

                      All very interesting, but completely irrelevant to the point.

                      And I’m not your boy, buddy.

                    • Molly

                      “You should think about whether you’re making the next “proud Islamophobe” feel validated as a normal part of society.”
                      Agree, McFlock.

                      There is such thing as a social contract, which we all uphold in order to define the society in which we live. This is outside of legislation and policy.

                      The guy has chosen the t-shirt to wear because he believes the mores of the society or community he lives in, accepts those premises or invites consideration on them. (He doesn’t strike me as someone inviting a physical altercation on purpose, or agitator but rather as someone comfortable in his surroundings).

                      Peterson – has chosen to be photographed in camaraderie with him – not as a prelude to one-on-one discourse, but “income stream”. He could quite reasonably have asked him to cover up, and with the number of similar thinking fans, should actually have a rack of various sizes for that purpose.

                      By allowing a publicity shot – he knowingly links his image, and incomprehensible popularity – with the ideas shown.

                    • Sam

                      What ever you say.

                      Edit: Interesting theory, Molly. There are plenty of Photos on the Internet with which we can test that theory. Incognito sighted the one with Green MP Golriz smiling with a know genocider. Funny thing is, I haven’t changed my principles about trashing context, have you?

                    • RedLogix

                      @ McFlock

                      Of course the T-shirt is stupid. It’s an idiot provocation of the type we see everywhere these days. All the time here at TS, but no-one cares when it’s politically pure lefties doing it.

                      Still all through this exchange you have avoided my principle contention; is it more likely to make the world a better place with shunning, banning, shaming and confrontation … or by opening honest and direct connections between people? Being kind and earning trust, so that when the moment is right your words are heard and taken to heart?

                      You seem to want to bet on the former path, and yet fail to produce any evidence that it works. Indeed it seems to be the ancient bet humans have doubled down on over and over countless times, and liberally daubed the pages of our history in blood.

                      My bet is on the latter plan, not because I think it’s obvious or easy, but that it stands a better chance of working in the long run. And what I wrote just below at 2:14pm to bleeple.

                      Also Matthew 5:44.

                    • McFlock

                      Of course the T-shirt is stupid. It’s a idiot provocation of the type we see everywhere these days. All the time here at TS, but no-one cares when it’s politically pure lefties doing it.

                      Provocation? seemed to be a pretty safe space for it. Which means it’s not “stupid”, it’s a warning sign about the crowd at that event.

                      Still all through this exchange you have avoided my principle contention, is it more likely to make the world a better place with shunning, banning, shaming and confrontation … or by opening honest and direct connections between people. Being kind and earning trust, so that when the moment is right your words are heard and taken to heart

                      Yes, the world would be a much better place if Nazis were shunned, banned, shamed, and confronted regularly and by everyone.

                      You can give them a hug when everyone else is done punching them. Because fuck those guys – having a society that tolerates their shit is how we got to where we are today.

                    • Sam

                      My little buddy. Right now there are thousands of police armed with 5.56 full auto rifles and Glock 9mm around every mosque in the country. How does that effect the theory that islamaphobia is “tolerated?”

                    • RedLogix

                      @ McF

                      OK that’s unambiguous enough, you’ve nailed your colours to the mast. Confrontation is the path you have firmly chosen.

                      Now ask yourself this; this guy in ChCh (apparently adam over on the other thread now deems we cannot mention his name because it ‘enables’ him) … in his manifesto explicitly anticipates that his massacre will trigger a backlash. This was not just the cold blooded murder of 50 people, it was an attempt to light the fire of mass civil conflict. It’s been done before as I describe below; it’s why he thought it worthwhile to effectively throw his life away in the attempt.

                      So what makes you so very certain you are not just doing this bastard’s work for him?

                    • McFlock

                      My little buddy. Right now there are thousands of police armed with 5.56 full auto rifles and Glock 9mm around every mosque in the country. How does that effect the theory that islamaphobia is “tolerated?”

                      I’m not your buddy, friend.

                      Repeated for the inveterately stupid:

                      having a society that tolerates their shit is how we got to where we are today

                      In other words, we now need armed police protecting mosques because weeks, months, and years ago people talked away things like that tshirt as “just a” [tshirt].

                    • Sam

                      My little friend. Societies have long been a place of tolerance. Christchurch has over 300,000 people. There is no way every one can know every face, so they have to tolerate each other. That’s life.

                    • McFlock

                      So what makes you so very certain you are not just doing this bastard’s work for him?

                      Because Yugoslavia didn’t start with massacres, it started with politicians boosting their own power by appealing to the lowest people, making fringe ideas mainstream. And where they can only use guns, we can use fists, eggs, humour, and even mail them dildos (like what happened to those terrorists who took over the national park office or whatever in the US).

                      That’s what this fucker is (hopefully) missing: he wants Muslims to massacre a church, or whatever. Which puts the onus on people of Christian and European descent to make it absolutely clear that this shit is not acceptable. If we speak out actively against these fucks, it carries more weight than just coming from the people those fucks want to kill anyway.

                      And we can start by saying “not in that shirt, you don’t”.

                    • McFlock

                      My little friend. Societies have long been a place of tolerance. Christchurch has over 300,000 people. There is no way every one can know every face, so they have to tolerate each other. That’s life.

                      I’m not your friend, guy.
                      And some things we shouldn’t tolerate, because we end up with some inadequate, insecure fuck shooting people a thousand times better than he will ever be.

                    • RedLogix

                      Because Yugoslavia didn’t start with massacres, it started with politicians boosting their own power by appealing to the lowest people, making fringe ideas mainstream.

                      That is exactly what I was describing below; “Most of the time they’re kept in check by the legal and social norms around them, but when political leaders begin to exploit the hidden fault lines that lie under all societies, for their own political purposes, these people feel enabled.” If you read people inaccurately the discussion will tend to wander around in circles.

                      It’s you who has unambiguously committed to confrontation in this thread. You’ve firmly placed yourself many times into the ‘punch a nazi’ camp; yet this is exactly the response our bastard wants.

                      How can you justify that?

                      There is of course one legitimate way to confront an idea you don’t like, and that it to have the courage and intelligence to stand up and use speech to make your case. Effective, eloquent and above all compassionate speech that will change people’s minds and hearts.

                    • McFlock

                      Jesus christ, now confronting nazis is the same as politicians actively seeking their support and encouraging their shit.

                    • Sam

                      Little guy, that’s all great in theory but how does that relate into practice. Other than virtue signalling and legalising censorship what does this all come down to? Now I don’t want to steal to much thunder from you, my little guy. What I’m going to propose to you my little guy is that we need a system of psycho technologies that are integrated together for dealing with the perennial problems that beset us as making meaning out of religion, religious intolerance, and intolerance in general. As to what those are I haven’t talked about them yet but you’ve seen a few of them, you’ve seen the confusion, and the parasitic process of gun ownership. So the idea of intolerance is as follows. We are vulnerable to self deception and self destruction precisely because of the very processes that make us adaptive. So the very process that are forward are adaptive and are exactly the same ones that make us vulnerable to self deception and self destruction. And so that is why they’re perennial problems that are endemic to us as commenters in the comments section.

                      So one of the things I would propose to you is psycho technologicalies, gun control would be one component of it, but I would argue the gun control is apart of a larger set of psycho technologies called active open mindedness. Being mindful is one, free flow of movement is another, but the whole thing is a set and how do they organise together and that structural functional organisation has to be directed to this> How can Jacinda and her Cabinet coordinate in an integrated fashion and deal with the perennial problems that beset us in away that is also responsive to our historical situation, with respects to where we have got to, with the increasing presence of the War on Terror in our lives and in our culture. Note that there are a lot of design demand on a set of psycho technologies that are properly constructed in terms of our best intentions that would help us best address our perennial problems, and also have an intellectual respectful and even perhaps address the cultural and historical crises that The War on Terror has put us in.

                      So this idea that all this theory is exactly what teed off this whole debate. In the end we will debate and I want to turn people away from the War on Terror both as a practice and as a final solution that’s operational with in there own lives and minds.

                    • RedLogix

                      Don’t weasel on me now McF. You are the one who unambiguously committed to physical confrontation in all it’s forms, shunning, banning, de-platforming, shaming and punching them out.

                      Yet when I point out the simple, logical and demonstrable consequences of this, you go all wobbly on me.

                      How about we take a break? I think we’ve both made our respective case, and I’m not trying to be needlessly provocative, quite the opposite really.

                    • McFlock

                      @sam

                      I’m not your guy, buddy.

                      Yeah, forget all that shit.

                      Just don’t give money to, or publicise, someone whose business model includes public acceptance of Islamophobia.

                      And call your MP about law changes to firearms. Report white supremacist posters to police and the council (they’re often on power poles and suchlike). Black ribbons might be becoming a thing – if they are, wear those. Call out the hypocrites who ranted online, on the media, or on the electoral trail about how bad Islam or immigration is, but who now are expressing their feelings for the victims and calling for national unity.

                      If someone is being a racist dick, speak out. If hitting a nazi is your thing and you find one, do that. If someone has a white supremacist bumper sticker, piss on it.

                      Because pretending “oh, it’s just free speech” didn’t do shit to protect anyone.

                    • Sam

                      You won’t infect me with your cancerous paranoia you little boy.

                    • McFlock

                      Don’t weasel on me now McF. You are the one who unambiguously committed to physical confrontation in all it’s forms, shunning, banning, de-platforming, shaming and punching them out.

                      Yet when I point out the simple, logical and demonstrable consequences of this, you go all wobbly on me

                      But they’re not “the simple, logical and demonstrable consequences of this”.

                      Encouraging nazis (e.g. saying “some of them are good people”) is not the same as thumping them.

                      Well, except for the submissive bondage ones who are just in it for the leather, but they’re a very small group.

                    • McFlock

                      You won’t infect me with your cancerous paranoia you little boy.

                      It’s not paranoia if they really do commit massacres.

                    • Sam

                      Was debating towards tolerance and peace. You toke the opposing side. Concede.

                    • McFlock

                      Bold demand. But that would mean it’s fine to run a business catering to self-labelling bigots, so no, I don’t think I will.

                    • RedLogix

                      Encouraging nazis (e.g. saying “some of them are good people”) is not the same as thumping them.

                      Not for one second did I say anything good about any extremist ideology. History clearly, clearly shows that all ‘totalising’ ideas that presuppose one simple idea to solve all problems, are invariably terrible things when turned into reality.

                      Yet it’s a terrible mistake to divide the world into ‘good and bad’ people. It’s not that ‘some of them are good people’; it’s more that we are ALL both good and bad at the same time, and we ALL have the capacity to choose either at any moment.

                      I’m no fool on this; if anyone chooses to act out a bad idea, then bam that is what the law is for. But until then, thinking bad ideas is not a crime. It may be stupid, it may be dangerous, it may waste your life away … but it is not a crime.

                      Because a person with a bad idea, always has the capacity to reject it and choose something better instead. It seems to me that in the long run encouraging that is by far the best bet.

                    • Sam

                      And there goes that little boy again. Micky baby, I’v lost all respect for you. You are a piece of trash and this is why. You will block people from entering a restaurant as Martin Luther King Jr was once told that he couldn’t enter a restaurant. You’re not just trash, you’re a little boy who hasn’t got a dam clue what the hell you’re talking about.

                    • McFlock

                      Because a person with a bad idea, always has the capacity to reject it and choose something better instead. It seems to me that in the long run encouraging that is by far the best bet.

                      This is true.

                      The trouble is that until they finally come to that realisation, they are a danger to everyone else. And when they can freely congregate as a normal part of society, the least of them come up with plans like this.

                      So we need to minimise and isolate that hazard, because we can’t eliminate it.

                    • McFlock

                      You will block people from entering a restaurant as Martin Luther King Jr was once told that he couldn’t enter a restaurant.

                      As a bouncer, I blocked people not because of the colour of their skin but because of the content of their character.

                      The ones who labelled themselves for me just made the assessment of their character more simple.

                    • Sam

                      It’s the trash man come to give us more words of wisdom from the bouncer who blocked not for colour or character community.

                      Try and get this through your thick head. Segregation is never an accepted argument. Ever.

                    • McFlock

                      Try and get this through your thick head. Segregation is never an accepted argument. Ever.

                      segregation is the entire job of prisons.
                      It’s also a key job for: toilet cubicles, cockpit doors, traffic lanes, cycle lanes, front doors, walls,…

                    • Sam

                      Hey, Trash Man. You lost at “segregation” and “prisons.” It’s all about having the right attitude and well, you’ve just got way to much.

                    • McFlock

                      So was this the same match you demanded I “concede” earlier, or is this another game I just lost? If so, is it best of three, or is there some other scoring system at play?

                      Meanwhile, on earth, go find yourself a racist to hug.

                    • Sam

                      Right at the beginning when you replied with attitude, you’ve been losing ever since, Mr Trash.

                    • He really hasn’t. You’ve been made to look like a chump, champ. 😆

                    • Sam

                      Been conceding so hard you too haven’t even noticed that you’re repling as “Trash Man.”

                    • McFlock

                      “Conceding so hard”…”Mr trash”… lol

                    • Sam

                      I’m sure you think very highly of yourself but you want to jail people for what they might say or wear.

                    • Muttonbird

                      Hey Sam. When you turned up a few weeks ago I though you might have a bit to contribute but it turns out you are a dickhead.

                      Please leave.

                    • McFlock

                      I’m sure you think very highly of yourself but you want to jail people for what they might say or wear.

                      Hate to break it to you, but you obviously lost the plot a while ago.

                    • marty mars

                      yeah spam piss off eh

                    • Sam

                      Muttonbird, Marty and Mr Trash. Of you are feeling like stress symptoms. Get help. Virtue signalling how tough you are over the Internet holds no water.

          • WeTheBleeple 12.4.1.2.3

            Haters gonna hate. Gonna target that hate and say – haters!

            I am the hater that hates haters.

            • RedLogix 12.4.1.2.3.1

              Many years back in the aftermath of the Yugoslavian genocides, I recall listening to an extended BBC Foreign Correspondent episode that went into some detail on what happened and why.

              The first 20 min or so, detailed in unsparing, shocking detail a number of the atrocities the correspondent had close knowledge of. One of them was so brutally appalling I wish I hadn’t heard it, and I’ve never recounted it to anyone; it’s that burdensome. (And I’m seriously not easily shocked.)

              Having set the bloody stage, the question was asked, why? How did these things happen, not between strangers, but in almost every case between people who had grown up and lived together in the same villages and towns all their lives. These were people who knew each other. And if you had gone on holiday to Yugoslavia prior to this war, you might have come home and commented what nice, friendly people they all were.

              The reasoning went that every society has it’s small, marginalised extremists, damaged people, resentful, bitter and dangerous. Most of the time they’re kept in check by the legal and social norms around them, but when political leaders begin to exploit the hidden fault lines that lie under all societies, for their own political purposes, these people feel enabled. In this context it’s Donald Trump we can certainly apportion some responsibility to.

              And at some point they will feel emboldened to commit an atrocity. And what happens next is critical. If this trigger is exploited to further any political agenda, this enables an opposing reaction larger than the first. Indeed Tarrant appears to have anticipated exactly this and states this outcome as one of his goals.

              When that happens our BBC correspondent concluded ‘that a society will unzip from the bottom up’ with astounding rapidity and violence. We should guard against this very seriously indeed.

            • cleangreen 12.4.1.2.3.2

              (joke) her for WeTheBleeple

              Does ‘Mad hatter’ rhyme with ‘ I am the hater that hates haters’.

              Ha ha ha (just a silly joke no offence intended.)

            • greywarshark 12.4.1.2.3.3

              Beware – This is not PC. It is satire. /sarc
              National Brotherhood Week.
              (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bH1e8uZzTaY

    • Incognito 12.5

      Don’t judge a book by its cover. People read way too much into photos, which is sad and ironic in this day and age (i.e. they should know better). It reminds me of the controversy around an MP smiling on a photo with a Rwandan war criminal and convicted genocide perpetrator. Enough said.

      • Sam 12.5.1

        You killed my fun. I was getting to that.

        • Incognito 12.5.1.1

          You spoilt my fun. I was getting to that.

          FIFY

          I fail to see the funny part but I do feel a little humourless today 🙁

          • Sam 12.5.1.1.1

            Been a big buzz kill lately

            • Incognito 12.5.1.1.1.1

              What’s the point of your insensitive comments? Do you think you’re funny?

              I could send this comment to trash but I won’t – I got very very close – and leave it as signpost and maybe somebody else will deal with it.

              • To paraphrase, Sam’s a dead commenter talking. Just a matter of time. Ignore it.

                  • Sam

                    Can speak for myself. You asked some legitimate questions. First off you accused me the other day for lacking skills or knowledge about reading between the lines and now you’ve transformed into Drax from Gaudians of the galaxy who takes everything literal. And no, I’m not being funny, because the events of the last two days is a big stupid buzz kill. You lot are something.

              • RedLogix

                Welcome to the ongoing self-doubt that is moderation Incognito. 🙂

      • McFlock 12.5.2

        I’m not saying Peterson’s a Nazi. I’m just saying he doesn’t have a problem posing by self-labelled (in big fucking letters) racists. Who pay to hear his lectures and have photos with him. Because that’s the audience he attracts.

        • Sam 12.5.2.1

          It’s been proven that Peterson’s audience is made up of a wider selection than just racists. Do better please. You radical leftists make us lefties look like total twats.

          • The Al1en 12.5.2.1.1

            That’s a bit unfair on radical lefties. You’re doing a great job solo.

            • Sam 12.5.2.1.1.1

              Don’t get payed for this so there’s no need for complements.

              • It wasn’t a compliment, more a statement of fact.

                And it’s Paid, just like it’s borders, not boarders. 😉

                • Sam

                  Prove it. Edit: Prove that I’m doing a good job or concede.

                  • You want me to prove a negative?

                    You’re not long for this world, so knock yourself out, whilst you can lol

                    • Sam

                      So were you complementing me or making a statement of fact. Since you are now in WTF mode that’s well, that’s you conceding.

                    • No, I’m saying you’re doing a great job by yourself of looking like a twat.

                    • Sam

                      I’ll quote you: “you’re (that’s me) doing a great job.” Why thank for the concession. You got slapped, picked up an injury, now you can’t stop writing gibberish.

                    • If you’re taking “you’re doing a great job by yourself of looking like a twat” as a victory, then go for it, soldier.

                      I’m watching the football now. Piss off. 😉

                    • Sam

                      What’s up with him^^^. Starts off all hard and strong then turns tail and runs. Lefties these days don’t know squat about debating.

          • McFlock 12.5.2.1.2

            And yet he’s still cool with that shirt.

            • Sam 12.5.2.1.2.1

              The only authority I have to go by as to the authority of your political caption around a Peterson picture is “cool” and “shirt,” and a descending waterfall down this comment section.

              • McFlock

                You don’t need a caption. Peterson is in the damned picture.

                • Sam

                  You lost me at “cool” and “shirt” and waterfalls. I sense a bit of frustration. It’s this same feeling of lose and numbness why psychologists across the country have been saying don’t watch or reproduce terrorist propaganda material. If you don’t want to listen to me then I suggest you listen to them. Y’know? If your feeling stress like symptoms then there’s lots of help out there. It’s just a phone call.

                  • McFlock

                    So the idea that putting your arm around a racist’s shoulder for a photo signals some lovel of approval, tolerance, or acceptance of racism is beyond you?

                    • Sam

                      I can’t prove that. No idea who the guy is, all I have to go by is some statements about cheap fashion. I haven’t worn black or white since high school and the off All Blacks match.

                    • WeTheBleeple

                      I have a photo of my best mate sitting beside my brother. My brother wears a white power t shirt. My best friend is still my best friend. My brother is still a piece of shit. He’d never be seen dead in that shirt now – he might lose business, just the company of men who approve. But we tried.

                      Rejecting all the racists in my life I’d have to have told most of the white people to fuck off. I prefer to challenge them, to tell them their behaviour is unacceptable but they are redeemable.

                      Anyone thinking someone standing next to someone with an offensive shirt is aligned with the offensive shirt – is completely full of shit.

                      If Peterson wore the shirt you’d have something. Back to your cots you need your blankie.

                      Peterson is the poster child for haters to hate on. Meanwhile I doubt 10% have read anything past the sound bites media take out of context.

                      Hysterical hou ha. Please, get a fucken life.

                    • “Anyone thinking someone standing next to someone with an offensive shirt is aligned with the offensive shirt – is completely full of shit.”

                      Good job nobody did that, then.

                      If my best mate wore a white power apparel, and meant it, they wouldn’t be my best mate. I’d feel sick to my stomach every time I saw them. I certainly wouldn’t want to be pally with a racist in the hope of talking them out of it.

                    • Sam

                      Of course it’s bad, unless you’re operating on a massively different definition to what weeble said.

                      Virtue signalling is just making empty statements or actions to back your self-righteousness. There’s nothing positive about it because it lacks even enough sincerity to genuinely care about the cause you’re championing.

                    • “Virtue signalling is just making empty statements or actions to back your self-righteousness. There’s nothing positive about it because it lacks even enough sincerity to genuinely care about the cause you’re championing.”

                      I’m not self righteous, on this, I’m just right.
                      I have lost people I thought of as friends directly because of my negative reactions to their racism and bigotry, and my refusal to accept any part of it in my social group. Those people, I don’t want to change, I just want them to stfu and gtfo.

                      Whether you choose to accept that as insincere and uncaring on my part, well that’s okay, I don’t voice my opinions to silence those of you or anyone else.

                    • Sam

                      Can’t help you with that.

                    • Not that I need it but I don’t think there’s anything much you could help me with at all.

                    • marty mars

                      Onya The Al1en – I too sever toxic racists from my life. Had to do it a few times and will continue to as needed.

                    • Sam

                      Don’t have to question me about who you decide is friend or foe. Concede.

                    • Loud and clear, Marty. 🙂

                    • greywarshark

                      The Allen
                      You missed a major point in that comment about the tshirt. The point is that some of your close family may take a stance that seems alien to what your family seemed to believe. If you are going to strongly dislike and disassociate yourself from such people it means breaking with people in your family that you love or at least ‘relate’ to. Not something done quickly.

                    • So what you’re saying is that I should be prepared to cut some slack to a knuckle dragging islamaphobe loser just because we share the same parents.

                    • Sam

                      So now I don’t want to speak with false precision here. Just to answer any sort of question with any authority would mean that I am a connoisseur of many different styles because this is the kind of thing we have to practice to get a sense of. We can compare statements and feats / facts to see what works and what doesn’t and we go back and fourth like that strengthening each argument until it’s obvious that one has conceded. So that’s how I would respond to the questions of choosing ones family members.

                    • McFlock

                      Anyone thinking someone standing next to someone with an offensive shirt is aligned with the offensive shirt – is completely full of shit.

                      Agreed. All we can conclude is that at least one person in that picture wanted to associate with the other, and the other didn’t let the shirt get in the way of that. Accepted it as a price of doing business.

                      And we’re not talking about your brother. We’re talking about a customer taking a paid photo with someone they admire. As a bouncer, I did enforce a dress code. That shirt would have been on it. Not because of my personal preference, but because no bar I worked at wanted to become a watering hole for racist shitheels who scared everyone else away. The same reason gang patches weren’t welcome.

                      Obviously Peterson’s business plan doesn’t include such reservations.

                  • Gabby

                    Funny how your literacy comes and goes sambam.

        • Incognito 12.5.2.2

          It is not about Peterson, they guy in the T-shirt, or the actual photo. It is about how people react to it and ‘interpret’ it and right now it stirs up a whole lot of emotions in people who are f-ing hurting (and not just today although the Christchurch massacre has ripped open many old ‘wounds’).

          To post or not to post for a photo with a ‘fan’ is a binary choice. Everything else is fuzzy and subjective. If it were about the two people in the photo they could have been interviewed but we don’t know anything about their thinking or reasoning so we fill the void with our own projections, projections to which we are wedded …

          Between you and me, the discourse (quality of comments) here on TS has been very disappointing and I confess to be quite surprised about this. Shows my naivety I guess.

          • marty mars 12.5.2.2.1

            No it IS about the t shirt and everything it is designed to do. It is a part of creating fear and terror. It is not just a garment. And having that person embracing the person wearing the shirt is telling because many of us have highlighted the connection from weak hate speech to hate crimes and murders yet some refuse to listen and use every technique to change the subject. Imagine a Muslim seeing that shirt not just today but back when he wore it. The lack of empathy and ability to see the side of these Muslim kiwis is what is really wrong. Māori have talked about this for years yet even with this horrendous event some continue to look after their own silo. Sad.

    • Macro 12.6

      Well the” Professor of piffle” with his arm around a devoted fan. Peterson, the stupid man’s smart person, gives his alt-right fan base through his you-tube rants and half baked twitterings the “authority” to continue with their bigotry and hate. He may not go so far as to claim white genocide through immigration, but his misguided pronouncements wrt immigration are dog whistles to the bigots and idiots whose only response is violence. Make no mistake, Tarrant will be a keen follower.

    • Rae 12.7

      Can you get that pic to Sean Plunket?

      • McFlock 12.7.1

        He’s got his own twitter troubles. The replies can be NSFW though…

  13. Dennis Frank 13

    The best way to eliminate fear of islam is to delete the tenet in the Koran that requires believers to kill non-believers. It would require a consensus of islamic doctrinal authorities to agree, of course. A global conference would be the way to organise this outcome – preferably called by the UN in the cause of world peace, to eliminate terrorism. Violence addicts on both sides would be outraged by the spectre of non-violence becoming a global ethic. Tough shit.

    • McFlock 13.1

      You might want to go through some of the old testament, too. Although folks tend to focus more on the two passages against homosexuality than the eight that ban shrimp on the barbie.

    • arkie 13.2

      The terrorist in this case quoted biblical passages too, should we also be cleansing the Bible by global council to eliminate terrorism as well?

      • Dennis Frank 13.2.1

        Yeah, go for it. I haven’t seen any such passages identified in the Bible, but any time you spend hunting for them would be worth the effort. I recall a likely candidate in the old testament – where Jehovah told the Israelites to kill all the tribes in the promised land. However the Israeli govt has inexplicably refrained from citing this divine mandate to eliminate the Palestinians via genocide…

        • arkie 13.2.1.1

          The terrorist cited Matthew 26:52

          “Put your sword back in its place,” Jesus said to him, “for all who draw the sword will die by the sword.

          and then there’s Matthew 10:34-36 where Jesus says

          “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law — a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household.”

          • Dennis Frank 13.2.1.1.1

            Man, he sure is confused! The former advocates non-violence. The latter seems advocacy of unconventional morality, explicitly opposing traditional family members. Even if a metaphor, the chosen language was inappropriate from our perspective but I agree it could suit the shooter.

            However neither qualifies as a moral equivalent of the command the Prophet issued to his followers in the Koran. Strawmen.

            • McFlock 13.2.1.1.1.1

              What about the old testament:

              Deuteronomy 17

              If there be found among you, within any of thy gates which the LORD thy God giveth thee, man or woman, that hath wrought wickedness in the sight of the LORD thy God, in transgressing his covenant; 17:3 And hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them, either the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heaven, which I have not commanded; 17:4 And it be told thee, and thou hast heard of it, and enquired diligently, and, behold, it be true, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought in Israel; 17:5 Then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing, unto thy gates, even that man or that woman, and shalt stone them with stones, till they die.

              Or Deuteronomy 13:

              6 If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying, “Let us go and worship other gods” (gods that neither you nor your ancestors have known, 7 gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other), 8 do not yield to them or listen to them. Show them no pity. Do not spare them or shield them. 9 You must certainly put them to death. Your hand must be the first in putting them to death, and then the hands of all the people. 10 Stone them to death, because they tried to turn you away from the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery. 11 Then all Israel will hear and be afraid, and no one among you will do such an evil thing again.

              12 If you hear it said about one of the towns the Lord your God is giving you to live in 13 that troublemakers have arisen among you and have led the people of their town astray, saying, “Let us go and worship other gods” (gods you have not known), 14 then you must inquire, probe and investigate it thoroughly. And if it is true and it has been proved that this detestable thing has been done among you, 15 you must certainly put to the sword all who live in that town. You must destroy it completely, both its people and its livestock. 16 You are to gather all the plunder of the town into the middle of the public square and completely burn the town and all its plunder as a whole burnt offering to the Lord your God. That town is to remain a ruin forever, never to be rebuilt.

              Or Numbers 31, where God commands the Israelites to attack Midian and kill all the men, all the married women and all the male children but to keep the virgin females as the spoils of war and distribute them among the soldiers. The reason offered for that barbarism? Two Midianite women had allegedly “tempted” two Israelite men to worship other gods.

              • Dennis Frank

                Well done. There’s a danger some here may use this to file you into the `religious nutter’ category but I promise I won’t be one of them!

                I suspect christians would wriggle off these moral hooks by saying `yeah, the god of the old testament was a bad god, and that’s why Jesus reformed him, and why christians formulated the new testament – to provide a positive alternative.

                Some would be cleverer, and cite the commandment `thou shalt not kill’ together with your citations to prove that the old testament god was actually schizoprenic.

                • arkie

                  Alright clever clogs, here is a similar commandment from the Qu’ran

                  al-Isra 17:33: And do not take any human being’s life – that God willed to be sacred – other than in [the pursuit of] justice.

                  • Dennis Frank

                    If I was an islamic zealot, I would explain that following the Prophet’s directive to kill unbelievers is the pursuit of justice – since unbelievers are not sacred and it is therefore just to eliminate them as directed.

                    Normally it helps to have an imam carefully explain such theology to zealots, to make sure they get it right, so I may be erring in suggesting that zealots are capable of thinking for themselves…

                    • arkie

                      You know best, as always, Dennis.

                    • solkta

                      You know you can’t argue with Frennis Drank.

                    • McFlock

                      Like Christian zealots have a pastor or other spiritual leader.

                      But if you want to compare the holy texts, you need to adopt an equivalent interpretation of them: not zealot for one and ordinary joe for the other.

                      This fucker found some inspiration from one text, the nice people who ran food banks and community support activities found their inspiration from another text. Stop pretending one text is better than the other, because fuckers and nice people can follow either.

                    • marty mars

                      Dennis is the knowledge king – what he doesn’t think ain’t worth thunking.

                • greywarshark

                  Yay for New Testament Christians – they are the true believers. And I do believe that. The old Testament was amended once Jesus came to the world. Some people haven’t caught up with that yet. It’s not meant to be dramatic, exciting and bloody in Christianity.

                  • McFlock

                    But peeps gonna interpret it the way they want.

                    I recall a story about one order at the height of inquisition-fever, which really wanted to get in on the protection racket of “indulgences or torture”. But the order’s founder had been a genuine nice guy, and issued an edict that no member of the order could draw blood, so a few hundred years later the monks were missing out on the loot.

                    Then they figured out hot oil and red-hot implements cauterised any wound they made.

                    I sort of have this idea of, if heaven is real, the saint crying to JC “but I tried to leave no loopholes!” and JC responding “fucking tell me about it, dude”.

    • WeTheBleeple 13.3

      While you’re at it edit the bible. Blithering shit again.

    • Stuart Munro. 13.4

      Although revised versions of the Bible are abundant, attempts to revise the Koran are considered anathema. A single typo is sufficient to have a whole print run destroyed. A verse inadvertently omitted caused a political crisis not so long ago:

      http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/335404.stm

  14. Ad 14

    I’m not sure this post would work if the attacker had been from the far left.
    There’s plenty of reformist and revolutionary history that would give anyone pause on that, including our own.

    Within minutes of the attack last night, the New Zealand left’s own Redline had put the blame for the attacks on the participation by the New Zealand state in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    https://rdln.wordpress.com/2019/03/15/the-massacre-in-christchurch-individual-terrorism-was-nurtured-by-state-terrorism/

    Sick reasoning, but I wouldn’t want to stop them saying it.

    I do not believe a test to stop free speech is whether a poster complains against the military or again the U.N.

    I would suppress them on the same grounds that I would stop a terrorist. Under our act that is defined as whether the act was:

    – intended to cause the death of, or other serious bodily injury to, 1 or more persons;
    – for the purpose of advancing an ideological, political, or religious cause;
    – with the intention of inducing terror in a civilian population or unduly compelling or forcing the government to do or abstain from doing any act.

    I would expect however that we would speak much, much louder.

    • BM 14.1

      The guy in his manifesto described himself as an eco-fascist, he wrote the nation with the closest political and social values to my own is the People’s Republic of China, he’s heavily into workers rights and environmentalism

      The guys a full-on socialist, not the NZ media will publish that bit of truth as it doesn’t suit the current narrative.

      • arkie 14.1.1

        GTFOH with your ‘full-on socialist’ narrative

        To Antifa/Marxists/Communists
        I do not want to convert you, I do not want to come to an understanding. Egalitarians and those that believe in heirachy will never come to terms.I
        don’t want you by my side or I don’t want share power. I want you in my sights. I want your neck under my boot. SEE YOU ON THE STREETS YOU ANTI-WHITE SCUM”

        • BM 14.1.1.1

          Are you trying to tell me a base level working-class white Australian wouldn’t be a left-winger, not a Labor party guy?

          A country with a huge and powerful union movement, nope he’s not a lefty, he’s a far-right extremist?

          Come on, he couldn’t be any more left and it’s bullshit that people are trying to paint him as right-leaning because of Trump, Southern, Molyneux, Peterson or anyone else from the right that bunches the left wings panties.

          • Muttonbird 14.1.1.1.1

            I see you are another who is trying to distance your own speech from the actions of this white supremacist, and project it upon your enemies.

            It won’t work, BM, because literally everyone can see this was the action of an extreme right-wing white supremacist.

          • Sabine 14.1.1.1.2

            ahhhh,

            that is why all those white working class men always vote for labor right?

            Especially the ones with economic anxiety, never met a labor leader they would not vote…right?

            that is a very sad comment BM even by your standards.

          • marty mars 14.1.1.1.3

            pathetic bm just fucking pathetic – what a right wing piece of shit you are – fuck off.

          • Gabby 14.1.1.1.4

            Shatpant’s even further down the fascist road than you BMmer.

          • adam 14.1.1.1.5

            BM this is the problem I have with the right, you won’t own your own bullshit – or bullshitters.

            The guy killed people because they were brown and he hated their skin colour.

            I know there are flaws on the left, but killing people because of the colour of their skin is not one of them. That is one the right have to own.

            Your refusal to accept that just makes you look just like another enabler of racist murder.

            • greywarshark 14.1.1.1.5.1

              adam
              You attempt to name the basic reasons for the attack and you miss out the religion and the way that it has been sullied by the brutal actions elsewhere of some claiming to act in its defence. That in itself is complex for the religion itself and impacts on the members of it who are innocent of any such behaviours, ever.

      • Incognito 14.1.2

        Have you read and analysed the whole manifesto?

      • Pat 14.1.3

        The guy is nothing other than a full on narcissist. I doubt if he would know a political ideology if he fell over one.

        • WeTheBleeple 14.1.3.1

          Absolutely Pat. It is Psychopathy. Narcissism. Self-entitlement’s extreme.

          • Sabine 14.1.3.1.1

            i hear its economic anxiety that affects especially the white working class male.

            how about its just a sane man with really fucked up ideas about life and a believe taht sadly the only thing awesome about him is his white skin?

            How hard is that to accept, that really there are white people who would kill others for being people of color and people of a faith not christian?

            Nothing to do with any mental illness, but learned behavior and in certain parts of this planet even acceptable behavior? You know as the short fingered vulgarian said after the march of the white boys in Charlottesville US : there are good people on both sides’.

  15. BM 15

    I would be highly disappointed in National if they dropped their opposition to the UN global migration pact.

    What happened in Christchurch as nothing to do with the migration pact.

    • Muttonbird 15.1

      Despite the gunman having written about the migration pact on one of his guns?

      I think it’s about a war on civilised society. The National Party seemed happy to partake until yesterday when they fell into line with decent people.

      • BM 15.1.1

        THat’s the problem with the UN migration pact, this should be something that people vote on, not something governments do under secrecy and try and sneak through without anyone noticing.
        Not everyone wants this one world government that the UN is so keen to bring about.

        That lack of democracy is what leads to events like what happened in Christchurch.,

        • solkta 15.1.1.1

          Just another fucking apologist.

        • Muttonbird 15.1.1.2

          Not everyone wants this one world government that the UN is so keen to bring about.

          You and Tarrant share a lot of paranoia on this. I’d like security services to investigate you because I think you are apologising for this murderer here and you’ve been posting a lot on the gun thread.

          And first you say it’s nothing to do with the migration pact and next you claim the problem is with the migration pact.

          You’re an idiot.

          • BM 15.1.1.2.1

            Christ man must you always be such a knee jerking fuckwit?

            I’m not happy about the UN migration pact but there’s little I can do about it, all I can do is go with the flow and hope it all works out for the best.

            • Muttonbird 15.1.1.2.1.1

              Most of your kinfolk have either not posted or have flounced from posting. This is because they actually accept that their speech is part of the problem and have withdrawn, tail between their legs.

              But your ego is so massive you can’t even get that through your thick head.

            • WeTheBleeple 15.1.1.2.1.2

              you are scum mate. you’ve proved it well before this event but it was kind of – oh, another delusional. But now we truly see you stand for nothing but the sound of your own voice.

            • Sabine 15.1.1.2.1.3

              and yet it was a white boy from OZ who killed . Not some refugees from far away lands.

              a white boy from OZ.

              go figure it out BM, you are smart enough.

        • lprent 15.1.1.3

          It is a treaty. This means that it gets handled exactly like all other treaties. It is accepted by the executive council on behalf of the crown. It is tabled briefly for about 20 days in the foreign policy select committee who may recommend but not change anything and then signed. Then the enabling legislation gets sent through parliament if any is required.

          You may remember this process from the TPPA debate – which was exactly the same thing.

        • greywarshark 15.1.1.4

          Is it one world government, or is it just that someone is trying to do something about helping the millions of people that are having their living and their homes destroyed by Western countries in wars being fought over oil and strategic locations. Either the West invades or it finds where a country’s wounds are, or creates some, then pours salt down them. That’s an analogy, or is it a simile. Somebody who likes language precision can tell me.

          There are people being pushed off the land they have lived on for yonks all over the world. Sorry you grumps, we do have to think about them as part of simple humanity. I just hope that we can take a few more and try and simplify our lives so we have more to spare for other people in distress.

  16. mauī 16

    We’re going to fight racism with fascism? Makes about as much sense as getting tough on gangs and expecting that to get rid of gangs.

    We’ve had decades of destructive centrist neoliberal policy that has decayed our society. That mostly explains these so called racists, they exist for a reason and the “extreme centre” as Tariq Ali calls it has provided an ideal breeding ground for them.

    • Sam 16.1

      Hahaha fuck no. It’s easy to imagine only so long as your imagination gives it the cursory barest strokes of thought and gives no attention to details. Life is change

  17. “If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. — In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant.”
    —Karl Popper, from The Open Society and Its Enemies.

    • greywarshark 17.1

      Thanks for that Brendan
      I hear about Karl Popper FTTT but haven’t seen his ideas set out at all.

      Sounds paradoxical to me, but when knowing the way that human society can behave, is perfectly correct in its complexity. The trouble is after watching the vid clip that Arkie set up about the Alt-Right and chan blogs it seems that they have already dropped rationality attempts in favour of shape-shifting, so one side will be shadow-boxing. Here in Christchurch he has pre-empted any discussion by using guns.

      The fairly recent case of the young man who sat in the USA church meeting and then calmly shot a number of people is an example of someone who has turned into a similar zombie state. Tv shows about dreaded Russian sleepers in society like The Americans scare the peeps. But it looks as if they have the same sort of thing in their own society with their own people going rotten at the core.

      • Stuart Munro. 17.1.1

        Popper’s definitely worth a read – and The Open Society was very much informed by observation of NZ, he was here during the war & favourably impressed the likes of Alan Musgrave, who became prof of Otago.

        He also impressed George Soros, who funded the most recent reprinting of The Open Society – somewhat at odds with the usual actions attributed to him by web ranters.

  18. Sabine 18

    seriously?

    https://www.buzzfeed.com/richardhjames/sky-news-australia-pulled-new-zealand-attack-video?utm_source=dynamic&utm_campaign=bfsharetwitter

  19. Observer Tokoroa 19

    Managing Extremists

    There will be watery eyes and tears when this man who yesterday murdered 49 defenceless children, women and men, stands in the Dock to hear his just Punishment

    Admid makeup and tears the mother and aunties will turn up to explain to the Court what a lovely cuddidly boy the Monster is. A sheer delight of a lad.

    But there is no way a person who commits Murder can apologise to the dead. The Murderer has put himself out of the reach of normality. How on earth can an Extremist apologise to all the people he slaughtered on behalf of his Right Wing mates. ?

    Much the same with a Rapist. Rape is the crime that delights and defines a sexual Criminal. No word or deed will ever make up for that devastating crime.

    The Same with Gangs. They live only with one thing at their Fingers! The horrible deadly Power of Death. A very large slice of our society is run by the Gangs. Young men busily converted into evil.

    Then there are the Drug Dealers. How do they Apologise to for their twisted, distorted addictive, enforced activities ?

    An Apology does not work. Prison Time – does not work. Religion – does not work. Love of ones Mother – does not work.

    And in the meantime the destructions continue, individul by individual. More Murders; more Drugs; more rapes; More gangs. More desperate unhappiness.

    Each of these persons are an enormous threat on our Society. Apologies and explanations count for nothing. Families in Jeopardy. Police in Jeopardy. Nurses abused and assaulted. Teachers too.

    It was not long ago that Society – removed its Crims from the community. Perhaps that was the correct thing to do. There was massively less Crime.

    • left_forward 19.1

      No redemption then seer of Tokoroa?
      This is utter bullshit.

      • Gabby 19.1.1

        Shatpant can say sowwy as much as he likes after he’s banged up and the key is parked a long long way away.

        • left_forward 19.1.1.1

          Forget about shatpants – it’s how we (everyone but shatpants) respond that’s important.

      • WeTheBleeple 19.1.2

        Despair is a part of the grieving cycle. Let it go.

        • left_forward 19.1.2.1

          Lynch mobbism is not part of the greiving cycle. We feel what we feel, but it is important to encourage each other to be concious of what causes the cycle of violence, particularly now.

    • Sabine 19.2

      i have read description of the video on a NYT message board of all people.

      It appears that he has shot motionless bodies on the ground to make sure they are dead.
      I don’t care how his mother thinks he is a good boy, the mothers of many other murderers thought so too, and maybe they must think this because who wants to admit to have birthed an abomination?

      But i would be happy with him going to prison for the rest of his earthly days. After that purgatory and hell if they do exist.

      Gangs, drug dealers, and other crimes have asked forgiveness, and have been given it. And some have left gangs, have stopped dealing drugs and have become decent members of society.

      I leave rape out of your list, as as of now society does not prosecute it for the crime it is.

      but forgiveness for this guy does not only come from the society at large, it must come from the community most affected and it is their right to either forgive or not . No matter how hot the tears are no matter how many times the Ersatz Nazi begs forgiveness.

  20. Chris T 20

    Simple question

    Don’t need a lecture.

    Just an answer with a single entity

    Who decides what is hate speech and what isn’t?

    • left_forward 20.1

      You do Crusty… its fucking obvious.

    • Sam 20.2

      High Court.

      • Dennis Frank 20.3.1

        Legalese: intelligible to lawyers, gibberish to others. Relevance to real life is determined via case law.

        “It shall be unlawful for any person— (a)
        to publish or distribute written matter which is threatening, abusive, or insulting, or to broadcast by means of radio or television or other electronic communication words which are threatening, abusive, or insulting”

        So the publisher of The Standard is breaking the law publishing comments by Marty & several others that fit this description? Only if a court so decides. If no prosecution happens, the law has no relevance in real life.

        So much for the credibility of hate speech as a social category. Just another bullshit scheme…

        • Incognito 20.3.1.1

          The question was for “a single entity”, not “a lecture”.

          Yes, the Law is written in Legalese, for a reason. It is for the people to know the Law and rightly interpret it. This means all people, not just lawyers.

          Is a comment with expletives by default (by definition) hate speech? You left out the relevant part:

          It shall be unlawful for any person—

          being matter or words likely to excite hostility against or bring into contempt any group of persons in or who may be coming to New Zealand on the ground of the colour, race, or ethnic or national origins of that group of persons.

          • Dennis Frank 20.3.1.1.1

            Yes, but when the Canadians were proposing to visit here I countered the claims that they are breaking our law by pointing to the lack of proof of that.

            Wild assertions by leftists routinely fail to impress anyone. That’s why the media usually ignores them, I presume. Not founded in reality. Nonetheless, having an open mind, I decided to wait and see if a prosecution happened. It didn’t. That’s my point about case law. Until we get it, the law is irrelevant.

            The reason everyone ignores the law is primarily the lack of precedent established by case law, but also the fact that everyone views legalese as gibberish. Without a societal buy-in, there’s no basis for consensus.

            • Incognito 20.3.1.1.1.1

              I’ve already mentioned that the Law sets the outer boundaries within which we have to conduct our affairs and live our lives according to the prevailing moral and social limits.

              The Canadians could not be prosecuted under NZ Law for a crime they had not (yet …) committed under NZ jurisdiction.

        • marty mars 20.3.1.2

          Weak effort Dennis – I’m embarrassed for you.

    • Sabine 20.4

      i do
      he does
      she does
      you do
      they do
      we do

      we all do know what hate speech is.

      so Honey, you have to decide what hate speech is when it comes into your life. And you can either do something, or say nothing, or applaud.

  21. WeTheBleeple 21

    While hate speech is readily apparent (it makes everyone uncomfortable is the obvious sign) and should be discouraged, it is a term now being adopted by Dennis Frank to attempt to stamp out discourse, especially that which disagrees with his spoutings.

    This is classic right-wing tactics. (No no, I’m centrist I just like rubbishing the left cos I’m better than them).

    He’d also like to change the Quoran.

    He, The Dennis Frank, is a reasonable man trying to help.

    • WeTheBleeple 21.1

      I’m self-banning from TS for a coupla days. I’m being overly critical and, whether I have a point or not, being full of emotion and taking it out on others isn’t helping, especially at this time.

      Take care.

      • cleangreen 21.1.1

        WeTheBleeple;

        We are all tapped out here as this three days has been very hard on us all now.
        My Arms are so tired holding up two placards “save our planet” and another for over one hour during Fridays ‘climate strike’ was draining all energy out of my 74 yr old body.

        So I will now also sit back and let the night relax me for hopefully a new brighter day tomorrow.

        Keep safe all.

    • Dennis Frank 21.2

      Explaining why I disagree with someone is not the same as an attempt to stamp out discourse. Why try and suggest that it is? Any reader is likely to disagree with you.

      I’ve always disagreed with rightists way more than I disagree with leftists – my track record of doing so has been continuous since I decided the right are closet-fascists in 1970. So your attempt to misrepresent my political alignment is contemptible.

      • Psycho Milt 21.2.1

        Note WtB’s reply to their own comment at 10:42. Something like this makes feelings run high, and it’s a credit to someone that they can recognise it in themselves when they see it.

  22. Observer Tokoroa 22

    The Truth about Crime

    All Criminals are Extremists
    No matter how often you whitewash their Crimes.

    No matter how much you pretend they are not creating victims.

    No matter how much you think Rape is just something you do to fill in time, and create disease …

    Violence is a monstrous Crime – no matter how much you pretend it is not

    The Gangs are ongoing violence on wheels – destroying Kids with badges.

    Drug Dealers Kill Users. Whether you like it or not. Drugs are Devastation and Death.

    By pretending that nothing is wrong – and everything is going along all sweet – you are killing our Society.

    A lot of Nations are not so foolish as to allow that to happen.

    • Sabine 22.1

      and no matter how many criminals they kill they still have criminals.

      so your wanting the death penalty – is what you are arguing for? – , is not gonna change a thing.

      but maybe you want to go back further?

      heads on pikes at the cities gate? would that work for you?
      quartered and disemboweled and drawn by horses? thats more to your liking?
      a lynch mob maybe?

      it would just make murderers of us and we would be no better.

      so no, put him in a cell, give him books to read, gardening, cooking, cross stitch and such, three meals a day no seasoning, water for his thirst and let him live out his days in a oubliette.

  23. I feel love 23

    He doesn’t seem to be getting any support, fucking egg.

Leave a Comment

Show Tags

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • Membership: Australia and New Zealand Electronic Invoicing Board
    The Governments of Australia and New Zealand have announced the membership of the Australia and New Zealand Electronic Invoicing Board (ANZEIB) today. This is an important step towards implementing e-Invoicing across both countries to help businesses save time and money ...
    1 week ago
  • An end to unnecessary secondary tax
    Workers who are paying too much tax because of incorrect secondary tax codes are in line for relief with the passage of legislation through Parliament late last night. The Taxation (Annual Rates for 2018-19, Modernising Tax Administration, and Remedial Matters) ...
    1 week ago
  • Chatham Islands pāua plan approved
    Efforts to reverse the decline in the Chatham Islands pāua fishery are the focus of a new plan jointly agreed between government, the local community and industry. Fisheries Minister Stuart Nash says the plan was developed by the PauaMAC4 Industry ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Bill introduced for synthetics crackdown
    The Police will get stronger powers of search and seizure to crackdown on synthetic drugs under new legislation, which makes the two main synthetics (5F-ADB and AMB-FUBINACA) Class A drugs. The Government has today introduced the Misuse of Drugs Amendment ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Blasphemous libel law repealed
    The archaic blasphemous libel offence will be repealed following the passing of the Crimes Amendment Bill today, says Justice Minister Andrew Little. ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Coalition Government lassos livestock rustling
    New rules to crack down on livestock rustling will come into force following the passing of the Crimes Amendment Bill says Justice Minister Andrew Little. ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Medieval law axed
    The ‘year and a day rule’ rule will be repealed following the passing of the Crimes Amendment Bill, says Justice Minister Andrew Little. ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Further steps to combat tax evasion
    Further steps to combat tax evasion Revenue Minister Stuart Nash has announced New Zealand is expanding its global ability to combat tax evasion by joining forces with authorities in 30 countries and jurisdictions. Cabinet has agreed to add another ...
    2 weeks ago