Laurence Fox launches political party

[Ban-jani]

So you support hate speech. You support the law of the land being broken and you support opinions that are antisemitic or Islamophobic but are against anything that questions your identity.

What rights do you want and what rights do you not have?

Cultural Marxism

Students have every right to block speakers if they so wish, they are expressing their right not to hear. Of course they could let the speakers turn up and simply not attend if they didn't want to hear, but being a student is as much as finding a way of expressing yourself as it is denying expression to others. Far too much is made of this as students have always done it, it is now an issue because Cultural Marxism

You may not use the term cultural Marxist, but that is one of the starting points for these culture wars.

No politics scares me, i just think some political views are wrong, some are idiotic and some are the result of people being misled.

1. This is exactly why I said the other night you’re incredibly difficult to converse with these days. Suddenly you’ve jumped to me being a criminal and hating Jews, slightly hypocritical of you considering who you backed last year but I’ll let that slide.

No I don’t support hate speech but I support the right of people to hold any opinion that doesn’t incite violence. I don’t support Islam but I support the right of people to do so.

I don’t have to agree with it but outlawing an opinion, an opinion that doesn’t call for violence, is dangerous.

2. I’ll give you an example, that plank found guilty of hate speech for joking around with his dog and getting him to do a Hitler salute. I don’t own a dog nor want to do that but that has to be one of the most ridiculous cases in the history of our country and it’s a slippery slope to comedy being banned. How many comedians have done and said worse?

3. You said it yourself, just don’t turn up. Other students wanted to see these people and bought tickets but the imbecile identity politics obsessives didn’t think they had the right to do so and selfishly blocked speakers. Would you think the same if socialists were being banned from speaking? No you wouldn’t and it’s easy to support when it’s against those you disagree with. I on the other hand would be just as against as blocking speakers, if it was Galloway or one of your mob.

4. you seem far more obsessed with the term cultural Marxism than me.

5. I happen to think that when a society takes an ideology of socialism across all economic policies it’s idiotic, it doesn’t work, and a mixture between left and right economics is healthy. You don’t agree but that’s fine, I support your right to think that.

 

[Rascal]

1. This is exactly why I said the other night you’re incredibly difficult to converse with these days. Suddenly you’ve jumped to me being a criminal and hating Jews, slightly hypocritical of you considering who you backed last year but I’ll let that slide.

You explicitly said you support anyone, you made no caveats. So by that measure anyone is anybody with any views whether they be antisemitic, Islamophobic, Fascist, anti vax. If you cant explain your points properly don't blame me.

No I don’t support hate speech but I support the right of people to hold any opinion that doesn’t incite violence. I don’t support Islam but I support the right of people to do so.

Now you qualify it having realised your mistake and seeing how it easy it is to be misinterpreted if you are not accurate.

I don’t have to agree with it but outlawing an opinion, an opinion that doesn’t call for violence, is dangerous.

So outlawing holocaust denial is dangerous.

2. I’ll give you an example, that plank found guilty of hate speech for joking around with his dog and getting him to do a Hitler salute. I don’t own a dog nor want to do that but that has to be one of the most ridiculous cases in the history of our country and it’s a slippery slope to comedy being banned. How many comedians have done and said worse?

It was provocative from a man known as being a provacateur. No it is not a slippery slope to comedy being banned it just wasn't funny. Again an example of supposed Cultural Marxism creeping in to the arts as the RW cranks were all saying at that time.

3. You said it yourself, just don’t turn up. Other students wanted to see these people and bought tickets but the imbecile identity politics obsessives didn’t think they had the right to do so and selfishly blocked speakers. Would you think the same if socialists were being banned from speaking? No you wouldn’t and it’s easy to support when it’s against those you disagree with. I on the other hand would be just as against as blocking speakers, if it was Galloway or one of your mob.

It would depend on the subject and the person speaking. Nothing to do with identity politics but to do with what is lawful and what is not. I have attended a speech by a right wing libertarian economist, I am glad I did because it reinforced my view that libertarians are cranks. I would not attend a speech given by Toby Young as he is a known eugenicist.

4. you seem far more obsessed with the term cultural Marxism than me.

Because i see how the term is being used by the right to create these culture wars that are now hammering the Liberal establishment. When Obama is called a Marxist, it is an attempt by the right to close down all speech from anywhere on the leftist spectrum. My original point was the Right are behind the culture wars egged on by the likes of Spiked who are funded by the Koch Foundation.

5. I happen to think that when a society takes an ideology of socialism across all economic policies it’s idiotic, it doesn’t work, and a mixture between left and right economics is healthy. You don’t agree but that’s fine, I support your right to think that.

I don't think you have the first idea of what Socialism is.


And finally what rights do you not have or you believe you don't have, because you failed to answer that.

 

[Ban-jani]

You explicitly said you support anyone, you made no caveats. So by that measure anyone is anybody with any views whether they be antisemitic, Islamophobic, Fascist, anti vax. If you cant explain your points properly don't blame me.

Now you qualify it having realised your mistake and seeing how it easy it is to be misinterpreted if you are not accurate.

So outlawing holocaust denial is dangerous.

It was provocative from a man known as being a provacateur. No it is not a slippery slope to comedy being banned it just wasn't funny. Again an example of supposed Cultural Marxism creeping in to the arts as the RW cranks were all saying at that time.

It would depend on the subject and the person speaking. Nothing to do with identity politics but to do with what is lawful and what is not. I have attended a speech by a right wing libertarian economist, I am glad I did because it reinforced my view that libertarians are cranks. I would not attend a speech given by Toby Young as he is a known eugenicist.

Because i see how the term is being used by the right to create these culture wars that are now hammering the Liberal establishment. When Obama is called a Marxist, it is an attempt by the right to close down all speech from anywhere on the leftist spectrum. My original point was the Right are behind the culture wars egged on by the likes of Spiked who are funded by the Koch Foundation.

I don't think you have the first idea of what Socialism is.


And finally what rights do you not have or you believe you don't have, because you failed to answer that.

I had typed a very long message to this but I’m not going to bother wasting my time so have deleted it.

I really cannot be arsed discussing a topic with someone who has absolutely zero respect and twists every sentence put across, to create a straw man to attack.

Im just going to leave it there as I’ll end up saying something I regret.

 

[Rascal]

I had typed a very long message to this but I’m not going to bother wasting my time so have deleted it.

I really cannot be arsed discussing a topic with someone who has absolutely zero respect and twists every sentence put across, to create a straw man to attack.

Im just going to leave it there as I’ll end up saying something I regret.

Say it, you are an advocate of free speech, I wouldn't deny you that platform.

If you cant make a cogent argument and have your posts pulled apart then learn to post arguments that are not full of holes.

 

[Ban-jani]

Say it, you are an advocate of free speech, I wouldn't deny you that platform.

If you cant make a cogent argument and have your posts pulled apart then learn to post arguments that are not full of holes.

You didn’t pull my post apart, you just invent things that you want to be my point, so you have an argument to attack and that’s why I cannot be bothered.

It’s not about free speech, it’s about your tiresome debating style.

I say I support the right of anyone not advocating violence, to hold an opinion, and you jump to “so you support antisemitism”.

I give an opinion on your politics and you just say “you don’t understand”, as if understanding the workers controlling the means of production is a difficult concept.

It’s incredibly boring and tiresome and I’m not going to waste my time with your arrogance and straw man arguments.

 

[Rascal]

You didn’t pull my post apart, you just invent things that you want to be my point, so you have an argument to attack and that’s why I cannot be bothered.

It’s not about free speech, it’s about your tiresome debating style.

I say I support the right of anyone not advocating violence, to hold an opinion, and you jump to “so you support antisemitism”.

I give an opinion on your politics and you just say “you don’t understand”, as if understanding the workers controlling the means of production is a difficult concept.

It’s incredibly boring and tiresome and I’m not going to waste my time with your arrogance and straw man arguments.

The point still stands though, you cannot say you support the right to anyone to hold an opinion, because expressing some opinion is against the law, some is immoral and some is downright disgusting.

If you do fully support the right for anybody to say anything you are whether you like it or not encouraging people to express views that are against the law, immoral or downright disgusting and that includes expressing views that are antisemitic, racist, homophobic or views that include holocaust denial, eugenicist and a host of other things that are societal taboo's

Look at the point I am making closely, I wasn't inferring you held those views, i was inferring you would allow others to express those views. This is the argument those on the right make about closing down free speech, what they really mean is they are closing down MY right to be racist, antisemitic, homophobic etc etc. They then use the trope of cultural Marxism to justify there free speech being eroded and it is nonsense. Everybody has the right to free speech to a limit, it is not totally free and in an ordered society cannot ever be totally free. This is where the likes of the Free Speech Union are wrong. Now you could make an argument that all speech should be free and everyone has the right to express any opinion they wanted, but as you were vocally against Corbyn and his expression of antisemitic views I assume you are not.

BTW you described Communism, not Socialism, there is a subtle difference.

Communism

All economic resources are publicly owned and controlled by the government. Individuals hold no personal property or assets

Socialism

Individuals own personal property but all industrial and production capacity is communally owned and managed by a democratically elected government.

 

[Ban-jani]

The point still stands though, you cannot say you support the right to anyone to hold an opinion, because expressing some opinion is against the law, some is immoral and some is downright disgusting.

If you do fully support the right for anybody to say anything you are whether you like it or not encouraging people to express views that are against the law, immoral or downright disgusting and that includes expressing views that are antisemitic, racist, homophobic or views that include holocaust denial, eugenicist and a host of other things that are societal taboo's

Look at the point I am making closely, I wasn't inferring you held those views, i was inferring you would allow others to express those views. This is the argument those on the right make about closing down free speech, what they really mean is they are closing down MY right to be racist, antisemitic, homophobic etc etc. They then use the trope of cultural Marxism to justify there free speech being eroded and it is nonsense. Everybody has the right to free speech to a limit, it is not totally free and in an ordered society cannot ever be totally free. This is where the likes of the Free Speech Union are wrong. Now you could make an argument that all speech should be free and everyone has the right to express any opinion they wanted, but as you were vocally against Corbyn and his expression of antisemitic views I assume you are not.

BTW you described Communism, not Socialism, there is a subtle difference.

Communism

All economic resources are publicly owned and controlled by the government. Individuals hold no personal property or assets

Socialism

Individuals own personal property but all industrial and production capacity is communally owned and managed by a democratically elected government.

I support the right for anyone to make those views, as long as it wasn’t inciting violence or harassing a specific person, without them being arrested, yes.

If a man wants to deny the Holocaust happened then he’s a total thundercunt and he’s going to do himself harm, when it comes to employment and making friends.

However, I don’t think in a society with free speech, the police should come and arrest him for that view.

The line should be drawn if he’s harassing a particular(s) Jewish person/people with his nonsense or if his rhetoric he’s calling for violence.

I know the law may differ now, I’m saying what I think it should be.

As I have said, give free speech to your worst enemy or don’t have it for yourself.

And btw, I didn’t describe communism, I said “the workers control the means of production” - not the government.

 

[Rascal]

I support the right for anyone to make those views, as long as it wasn’t inciting violence or harassing a specific person, without them being arrested, yes.

You were vocally against Corbyn supposed view's, he didn't incite violence or harass a specific person.

If a man wants to deny the Holocaust happened then he’s a total thundercunt and he’s going to do himself harm, when it comes to employment and making friends.

So it doesn't matter in this case if he upsets a whole community or race.

However, I don’t think I’m a society with free speech, the police should come and arrest him for that view.

We don't and never have lived in a society with total freedom of speech.

The line should be drawn if he’s harassing a particular(s) Jewish person/people with his nonsense or if I’m his rhetoric he’s calling for violence.

If violence is not called for then you think it is OK to say anything you wish. Why not just say that from the outset, it is what many people with views considered against societal norms want. They want the right to be racist, homophobic, islamophobic, antisemitic as they see fit. It is why people like Trump, he has allowed people to think they can say anything without impunity.

I know the law may differ now, I’m saying what I think it should be.

Which is fine, I disagree vehemently but it is your right to think the law is wrong.

As I have said, give free speech to your worst enemy or don’t have it for yourself.

We don't or never have had totally free speech.

And btw, I didn’t describe communism, I said “the workers control the means of production” - not the government.

I apologise i misread what you wrote. Workers control has been advocated by many groups from Anarchists to Christian democrats, Communists and Socialists in varying forms.


It is a shame you don't like my style, i like to think i am fair and even handed, i am also not perfect or always right, i do like to debate stuff though and if you would rather i didnt debate stuff with you then that is fine, i will desist in future.

 

[Ban-jani]

You were vocally against Corbyn supposed view's, he didn't incite violence or harass a specific person.

So it doesn't matter in this case if he upsets a whole community or race.

We don't and never have lived in a society with total freedom of speech.

If violence is not called for then you think it is OK to say anything you wish. Why not just say that from the outset, it is what many people with views considered against societal norms want. They want the right to be racist, homophobic, islamophobic, antisemitic as they see fit. It is why people like Trump, he has allowed people to think they can say anything without impunity.

Which is fine, I disagree vehemently but it is your right to think the law is wrong.

We don't or never have had totally free speech.

I apologise i misread what you wrote. Workers control has been advocated by many groups from Anarchists to Christian democrats, Communists and Socialists in varying forms.


It is a shame you don't like my style, i like to think i am fair and even handed, i am also not perfect or always right, i do like to debate stuff though and if you would rather i didnt debate stuff with you then that is fine, i will desist in future.

I disagreed with Corbyn, I never for one second suggested he had no right by law to say or do what he was in the party. My entire point is where the law falls and I’d defend Corbyn’s right to say whatever he wanted, as long as it doesn’t break the two tests of calling for violence or harassing specific people.

Yes that is correct, I am offended when I hear people calling Manchester City a plastic club with no history (trivial point I know) or when someone says Britain is a deeply racist or intolerant country... or white people have unconscious bias and racism built into them, then suggesting other races don’t. These things all offend me and a whole community of people but I don’t have the right to stop people saying it with the police, or to block them saying it by force, I have the right to disagree peacefully.

I know we don’t and I’m not calling for total free speech, that would allow me the ability to conspire to blow up parliament or a shopping centre. It would also allow me to walk down the street shouting racist obscenities at someone to emotionally damage them. I am against these two things being legal, conspiring to commit or calling for violence and harassment.

We are though, imo, too far away from totally having free speech, we should be closer to it, leaving out the aforementioned issues as illegal.

I am for that yes, the ability to say whatever disgusting thing you want, without you being arrested, as long as it’s not harassing specific people nor if it’s inciting violence. There can obviously be consequences, my employer can sack me for behaving in a particular way, my friends can shun me, private platforms like good old Bluemoon can block me.

If I found out a friend of my had stud in the middle of Piccadilly Gardens and said he hates black people, then he’s no longer my friend but he shouldn’t be arrested.

Take for example the neo nazi march in Manchester a few years ago. I would defend their right to march, peacefully, as much as I’d defend a centrist march or a pro/anti- Brexit march.

I am against the Home Secretary putting Extinction Rebellion on the list of those not allowed to protest, there shouldn’t be such a list.

My view here is across all divides, the communists have the right to march, as do the fascists.

As I have said, I am not against socialism being applied to aspects of society, health, utilities, public transport, mail etc. I am for these things having socialist policy applied to them. I am against it being applied as policy across all industries, sectors and business.

 

[stonerblue]

The whole thing this summer was, it wasn’t just a slave trader who got the statue removed, they also attacked other monuments, statues and the bloody police.

It was a completely hysterical response to something that happened in another country, when 4 Christians are murdered in France, you know our nearest neighbour, in the same year, for being Christian, total silence on the matter.

Why not?

Are you talking about the fla?