The ACLU’s mission used to be defending the civil liberties of everyone. The innocent, the guilty, murderers, rapists, white supremacists, nazis, everyone. The principle of defending civil liberties was the whole point, and the only point. But like I said, you guys like this version better. They’re on your team.
Correct, now the ACLU has realized that hey maybe the white supremacists are actually getting a little too close to their mission statement and it would be unwise to give them resources in the name of strict ideological consistency on a single issue, countervailing factors of the harm to minorities they openly intend to harm needs be considered … And the white supremacists now generally are able to get plenty of resources to defend themselves in court anyway.
Nice that you handwave away factoring in the safety and well being of minorities under imminent threat as “my team” rather than the side of decency in general… mask off…
4 Likes
Mask off? What the fuck are you talking about, guy? I’ve never hidden that I support defending the civil liberties of everyone, especially the most odious.
Mask off that you don’t consider “protecting the safety and well being of minorities” to be a team you are on. That’s the team the rest of us are on by getting all hysterical and trying to factor that shit in re: the cases the ACLU takes, and you want nothing to do with it.
It’s team civil liberties, that’s it, and whatever happens from there happens.
The ACLU has limited resources and a limited budget. They literally can’t defend everyone even if they would like to. Right now they’re busy trying to free kids from cages and contesting police brutality. Maybe when they’re done with that they can focus on Nick Fuentes.
4 Likes
Nah I don’t think the previous government or even the current one was targeting the most odious for its civil liberties abuse.
I doubt it, and so do the old-school civil libertarians who used to run the ACLU:
It’s a dumb argument though. The social and political climate today is very different from back then. Of course this should have a huge effect in their views.
In 1978, Ronald Reagan wouldn’t have said that the Skokie marchers were very fine people who just loved their country and that any counterprotestors were dangerous thugs who want to destroy the country. When the odious become the powerful, it’s time to adjust.
Unless your ideological consistency is the only thing you give a shit about, then I guess you can just stay the course.
1 Like
You all should have said “We’re talking about the Greenwald, not the ACLU, stop trying to shift Ked” but you didn’t for reasons I’ll never understand.
Greenwald went way above and beyond anything the ACLU ever did when he defended the white supremacists.
1 Like
Ked’s obviously correct too; if you’re not going to defend the civil liberties of deplorables when it’s really hard to do so, what’s the point of making a whole big deal about it? Just say civil liberties are trumped by a whole lot of other things and have that conversation instead instead of wanting it both ways.
Like how I’ve mentioned I used to hang out with the commies and would go with them to the little nazi gatherings and try to punch a few, right?
“Oh yeah I totally value their liberty, that’s why I came out to try to commit violent crimes against them…” Lol, come on.
Interesting piece, I’ve never heard of this spiked-online.com publication. I wonder if it has any particular point of vie-
" ‘Someone needs to stand up for freedom’
Laurence Fox on his anti-lockdown mayoral campaign."
" No, Boris is not waging an ‘assault on truth’
Peter Oborne has a nasty case of Boris Derangement Syndrome."
" The woke cultural revolution in our schools
Schools are encouraging children to call out ‘problematic’ language and behaviour."
Not sure what any of that has to do with their interview with Glasser.
It’s because they approve of the direction the ACLU has taken.
1 Like
And you, on net, are okay with the direction GG has taken. Seems like 2017 made it clear that the ACLU’s position of playing it both ways was untenable and everyone had to choose a side. Comfortable with the side I have taken.
I mean the ACLU literally went to court to get better locations for Unite the Right to waive around their assault weapons and terrorize the community in Charlottesville, and they end up causing a massive shitshow capped off with plowing through counterprotestors and killing one of them. All with the President’s support.
What normal, sane person would not reevaluate what the fuck they are doing with their lives after that?
Ira Glasser and the sort of people who made the ACLU a great organization uniquely devoted to defending the civil liberties of everyone.
Some Nazi makes up an obvious lie about being on the no-fly list and you clowns indulge Keeeed in a week-long jackoff session.
1 Like
Only because people like you would actually cheer if Fuentes was on the no fly list and would object if the ACLU defended his due process rights. It doesn’t matter if it’s true or not: you and your ilk are rooting for it and would defend it if it was actually happening.