because their president and his orcs Bannon, Gorka and Miller are openly encouraging this shit.

Enough! We should have had enough. It's time to turn the tables on these enemies of society, once and for all.

All Klan-infested states have made being masked in public a crime of its own.

Trump promised to make their bail, remember?

Some undoubtedly for protection (the little snowflakes) but I suspect that it was to hide behind as well.

A lot of them were whining about being victims.

I've seen enough garbage on FB and Twitter to know many of these types are quite proud of their assholery

Don't let them be anonymous. Tie their names to their photos so that google Searches find them. Only people who recognize the individuals can do that. Others, however, can take those identifications and make the doxxing effective against them. There are plenty of people who would be glad to spend some time in that effort, I guarantee.

But, first, we need to know their names. Each one of them has people who know them and dislike them intensely. That's why security camera photos of criminals almost always lead to an arrest. Everyone has enemies. "I saw that asshole on TV. He owes me $50, so I called the cops on him." That's how it works.

Every one of those Nazi assholes has enemies. Ex girlfriends they dumped after using them. People they owe money to. People they've harmed. Every last one of them. We just need people to identify them and others will see to it that they become even better known, to employers, family, and others.

It's time to take things back from the hoodlums and racists. Past time.

spring from groups such as these. ID them early on.

gets them to crawl back into the darkness. They may post crap on a FB page but the more well known they become in a community makes them harder to employ, etc. Make life as difficult for them as they want to do to other Americans. May not change their minds but it can make them less emboldened about their public actions. We have to use every tool in our arsenal.

Step into the light, motherfuckers.

But k and r.

These people went out in public to have their event, where they have no reasonable expectation of privacy. They did so for the purpose of drawing attention to themselves. If there are negative consequences as a result of the attention they sought, so be it.

I agree.

This is exactly what Trump wants and what he's created. He'll say he is sad, but this is. Eautifuo yo him. He is a White Suoremacist. The only thing he's sad about is that they aren't being allowed to kill the counter protesters.

... real deal Nazis who did a whole bunch of nasty stuff a few years ago.

Nice sentiment, but they would spit in your face. They have no desire for common ground, for compromise.

Just ask the ghost of Chamberlain.

this country is what they are called. They are only what they answer to.

That is the essence of freedom: you are what you answer to.

We who respect humans know that we don't have the prerogative to call humans something without also listening to what they answer to.

They name themselves. We don't get to name them. Or thereby control them. That's freedom.

And if they don't want common ground, there is still peace in boundaries.

Yes, we do get to name the thing we are seeing with our own eyes.

You don't find common ground with people who would just as soon put a bullet in your head if they had you captured in some backwoods cabin.

The only thing keeping them from exterminating entire races of people is the fact they're outgunned.

You might as well try to reason with a disease. The only good thing these people can do is die early.

There can be no dialogue with these animals.

Last edited Sat Aug 12, 2017, 06:01 PM - Edit history (1)

None of us know what they would do until they attempt in earnest to do it. They haven't. You can't act on what you only imagine or call them. They are what they do.

Furthermore, big guns don't necessarily hold fear, intimidation and ignorance at bay when big guns are just bigger shows of fear, intimidation and ignorance, all in all.

When democratic societies came along, the imperative to Live With Difference restrained the more civilized against condemning these shows to death, but letting them vent. Thus, the amendment right to assembly, even if they don't merit legal redress. They are reacting to different circumstances. And do you really know what those are.

No one's trying to "reason" with them, but because this country is America and not Germany, we're called to understand their general life context in a way that Germans weren't.

You can call them a disease, but they are only what they answer to. You can want them to die early, but you can't set them up to.

I hear you. You hate them. Wallowing in hate makes you and them, however you come by those aggressive feelings, cancel each other out.

Even in this democracy, we still have to learn what real freedom means. It means to live. with. difference. Even if it's someone's hate.

They're indisputably Nazis.

Nazis have constitutional rights. But beyond that we owe them nothing. Nothing.

We are not "called to understand their general life." And fuck that excuse-making "they are reacting to different circumstances."

They are simply evil, and the only proper way to deal with them is to ostracize them, to shame them, to heap scorn upon them, and keep them on the margins and fringes of society where they belong.

I understand them perfectly, just like I understand dog shit on the sidewalk.

pick it up and you'll call me a loser bowing to dog shit, and that you're not called to pick it up.

Great. We protest each other, ostracize each other and someday meet to do what ... fight for opposite sides? Arm ourselves?

Vote with an ever smaller segment of a political ideology while big money puts its bets on the ignorant?

I'm not feelin' the hate on this thread. I've said my peace.

Enemies are to be defeated, and enemies like this need to be defeated severely

I can't put it any more clearly or succinctly than this very apt tweet:

Link to tweet

Do people and groups like this have to hang others before you stop giving them more rope? Do you somehow differentiate between this gathering and similar ones before that have tortured and killed people they disagreed with? When should we draw the line? Wait until someone else is dying? Even then it is not you so give them more rope?

...and not totally comfortable with such a thing existing, given that it sounds unconstitutional and presumably would work both ways.

But maybe I'm wrong.

Universities teach us the range of knowledge and the means to live with difference.

We need to see what they do as the basis of democratic societies.

Obama a gorilla or something on her public facebook page. I think parents also wanted to keep her away from their kids.

Free speech means you can't be arrested or prosecuted by the government for the contect. Employers have the right to discharge you if your speech could make them look bad.

Consequences.

That was a civil rights situation, with free speech used as cover to maintain civil and social oppression.

That doesn't apply to this situation. This is a free speech situation.

Consequences have context and gain common law justification thereby.

during Reconstruction.

They're thinking "we rolled it all back then-we can roll it all back NOW".

or other groups who might be looking.

Publicly posting names, residences, work addresses can lead to very unfortunate unintended consequences. Things can get out of hand quickly when people show up at residences.

Sometimes people are misidentified or innocent people (like family) are targeted.

ETA: maybe local newspapers, too.

Should be watched over their careers in case they try to get elected dogcatcher or anything higher.

in the KKK ten years ago, damn right I want to know about it, and tell anyone supporting them that they were part of that hate group. I want them pressed to apologize and say those groups should have no part of politics.

BTW, I'm talking about non-government groups keeping an eye on political opposition, not the government. I don't think the police should be involved unless you've witnessed them committing a crime.

Last edited Sun Aug 13, 2017, 01:52 PM - Edit history (1)

need to be permanently blackballed from professions like that, as well as teaching etc.

They need to be shunned, ostracized, and marginalized.

History has taught us that all options should be on the table when it comes to defeating Nazism. Much better to do it via social sanctions and torpedoing their careers than by dropping bombs on them.

Let them vet whether it is true or not instead of posting on social media and letting the mob decide.

But in case you were being literal, no, this is not Communist China.

citizens' names to the police is really not what we in the United States are about. Is Japan?

The far right has been known to publicize the information of people they consider ideological enemies. I don't want to see some tit-for-tat war between the right and left because it can escalate quickly. I don't want the United States to turn into Weimar Germany.

Another problem is that doxxing will eventually cause a lot of good people to not want to speak out about issues because they will be afraid of being targeted by online lynch mobs. I can see the widespread use of doxxing causing more people to become less politically involved out of fear of reprisals. People need to feel like they can make their opinions heard without being threatened by doxxers otherwise doxxing will have a chilling effect on speech.

Any one of them that can be identified should be identified and doxxed. Their employers need to be contacted. Good employers will terminate the instant they're notified one of these scumbags works for them. The ones that don't need to be boycotted.

There's certainly an upsetting subset of people in this thread trying to "understand" a group of murderous thugs as though they were misguided children. In my experience, the first order of business with murderous thugs is to stop them first, and try to understand their widdle psyches only after they are no longer in a position to kill, maim, rape, and terrorize others.

"maybe we weren't tolerant enough towards the Nazis."

That's called "kidding on the square."

Out of town, schmout of town.

Somebody's gonna recognize these dudes.

but the people here don't have much money for traveling.

We need to go after their livelihood. We'll see how tough they are after they lose their jobs, health care, and homes. Let's see if Trump comes to their rescue then.

they will lose my business if they employ avowed Nazis (I'm assuming here some of them work for national companies).

Remember, the First Amendment applies only to government action. If private individuals want to respond to these characters in some (nonviolent) fashion, or if a private employer decides they don't want to hire them because they don't want neo-Nazis working for them, those actions are not covered by the First Amendment.

in any way that isn't violent or defamatory. The First Amendment doesn't protect people from the consequences of their speech if the government isn't involved. So if these assholes are identified and shamed on social media by private individuals or employers, that's not a violation of their free speech rights.

THINK LONG AND HARD ABOUT THAT ONE. Liberals aren't a universally-beloved species, you know.

I might not want to hire someone who identifies as a neo-Nazi, and I can decline to hire anyone as long as that decision isn't based on the person's inclusion in a protected class such as race, ethnicity, gender, sexual identification/orientation, or age. So if I see a Facebook post showing a photo of a job applicant standing in front of a Nazi flag and holding an AK-47 along with a caption that says "Sieg Heil," I'm probably not going to want to hire that person for fear they will be disruptive on the job or that they will do or say something that embarrasses my business.

If you post on social media, you're putting whatever you post out to the world in general. Many employers do check applicants' social media, and it's not at all unusual for someone to be fired because they did some assholish thing that casts the employer in a bad light. Many companies now have policies regarding their employees' use of social media. Like it or not, social media make it possible for employers to see what their employees are up to on their own time. If I am working for Chick-Fil-A or Hobby Lobby and I post a photo of myself on Facebook at a pro-choice protest wearing my pink pussy hat and holding a sign that says "Fuck Trump! Free Abortions For All!" I might get some blowback at work. And in most states I'd probably have no legal recourse.

that covers this situation, but not that I necessarily think it's a good thing. Fact is, if I knew someone was a Nazi I probably wouldn't want to hire him - for a lot of reasons. That's not obedient capitalism. You might want to look through your art supplies for a narrower brush.

What, you think that being a nazi should be a protected status, like being a woman, being gay, being a muslim, or being from Belarus?

There are some damn fine laws on what employers may and may not discriminate against.

Being a nazi ain't one of em.

Last edited Sat Aug 12, 2017, 10:29 PM - Edit history (1)

their belief in white supremacy public. So be it.

When I march, it is clear that I am a liberal. he purpose of the marches is to make my support for those causes public. If someone sees a photo of me marching for a liberal cause, and decides not to hire me because of it, likewise so be it.

...and after I no longer worked at either place I was appointed to the County Affirmative Action Commission and later the County Civil Service Commission. I have a strong interest in labor rights.

Take it from me: an employer who has grounds to believe that the reputation of their business or institution has been besmirched by the behavior of an employee, even during their time off or vacation, is within their legal rights to sanction or terminate that employee. Sure, the employee can fight for their job, but good luck with that. You'll get away with traffic tickets, but not a 100 mph DUI splashed all over the news. Smoking a bit of weed, probably not a big deal unless your job requires clean pee (heavy equipment operators, hospital workers, and cops, for instance). Actually being a drug dealer? Don't be stupid. Proudly and peacefully marching for your pet cause is certainly a protected activity, but carrying torches and weapons while screaming terroristic threats and fomenting a riot where people are killed? Don't think so.

I hope that helps clarify things.

that news.

I've got no problem with that whatsoever. You have a right to say whatever you want. You are not entitled to approval from those who hear what you say.

It doesn't mean shit between you and your employer, you and the people you do business with, or you and your neighbors.

n/t.

that of any Euro country---DEMOCRACY AND CONSTITUTION OUT THE DAMN WINDOW because of the beliefs of this particular group.

IOW, I'm also on the side of the law and the decisions of the Supreme Court.

I find it APPALLING that DUers are proposing to act like the former East German Stasi---keep track of the young ones; report them to employers; get them expelled or fired; have them lose health care; post names and photos.

But then, actual laws and legalities seem less and less important on DU these days, considering other threads where emotions and risibly faulty "analogies" prevailed.

Why yes, I DO know that someone was mowed down and killed today. I also know that the SUSPECT (aka, not legally guilty yet) has been, you know, ARRESTED. Should he have been dealt with instead by the Vigilantes of the Good?

What happened in Virginia was terrible but it is a matter for the police not online vigilantes. I fear that by overreacting we are playing into the hands of the far right who feed off of extreme responses. They want to provoke liberals and the left into an extreme response because they are itching for a repeat of Weimar Germany.

MM is simply suggesting that we give them that attention, and react to their beliefs within our own ethical boundaries. Nothing outside of the rule of law, nothing but a reaction to the views that the Nazis themselves made public.

A vigilante is someone who goes after someone because he suspects but doesn't know that person is guilty of something, and then illegally tries to exact the justice the vigilante thinks is due.

MM is proposing nothing more than that we help the Nazis in THEIR OWN overt effort to make their beliefs publicly known.

This is not overreaching. We have no legal or moral obligation to be nice to them, or to save them from their own monumental stupidity.

with respect to the speech of others. Whether doxxing or otherwise identifying people on social media is a good or appropriate thing to do is a separate issue. It isn't illegal, even if it's mean. People can decide for themselves whether it corresponds to their personal values.

If I just decide I don't want to hire a guy because he's a Nazi, that isn't harassment. If I find out the name of one of those Nazi douchebags and then picket his house, bug him on the phone, leave flaming dog shit on his front steps, pester his family, or slash his tires, that's clearly harassment. If I notify his employer that he's a Nazi, that's a shitty thing to do, but it probably wouldn't fall within most state statutes' definitions of harassment, because the conduct isn't repetitive or illegal (it would be making a true statement). If, however, I got the wrong guy and I told his employer he was a Nazi, that's actionable defamation and now I'm in trouble.

giving it to them.

Not sure why people are so hell bent on protecting the Nazi marchers against their own stupidity.

expectation of privacy. There is absolutely nothing legally or ethically wrong with using social media to spread the story of their participation in that public march.

I'm not going to lose a lot of sleep if they end up getting more publicity than they wanted. I don't think people should stalk them or try to harm them - that's illegal - but if they get some industrial-strength shaming on social media, I'll just take out my tiny violin and play a tiny, sad song for them.

am looking for someone to hire, or when I am considering who to date, or when I am deciding who to accept into my school (if that school is private.)

If I have seen them in photos proclaiming themselves to be white supremacists, I will certainly reject them and I have as much a right to do that as they have to proclaim that they are white supremacists.

I am really appalled at those posts that are essentially saying that, after these assholes have yelled their identities at us, we have to pretend we didn't hear them, and if we don't pretend then we are somehow unethical.

Do we want to encourage online lynch mobs to doxx people because of political speech or activities? These tactics can be used against the left and liberals just as much as against the far right. In fact, the far right gathers information about their ideological opponents and targets them for harassment and doxxing. We shouldn't stoop to their level.

If doxxing becomes a common political tactic I can see it having a major chilling effect on speech and many decent people will become afraid to voice their opinions. I don't want the United States to become like Weimar Germany where the most extreme people with nothing to lose take over political discourse.

If they're already doing it, "stooping to their level" sounds more like "beating them at their own game" to me.

One of them plowed into a crowd and killed someone. If the perpetrator were anything but white and Xtian, it would already be called "terrorism".

I am not afraid of anyone knowing my political affiliation, and PS, if laws need to be passed against this, then it will only happen if it affects the R's as well. Maybe our useless First Lady can get right on that "anti-cyber bulling" thing.

Lots of things suck that both parties do, which doesn't mean we should let the right get away with it out of our principles, while suffering the consequences (think gerrymandering and superPACs).

as long as they don't advocate immediate violence. The government cannot punish speech unless it is "directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action." (Brandenburg v. Ohio)

"is likely to incite or produce such action". I wonder how many people have to die at White Supremacy rallies before it becomes self-evident that they inherently produce/incite lawless action?

The city shut down the rally before noon, when things got crazy, and before the rally officially even started. Will the Nazis sue the city, claiming their free speech rights were violated? Will Brandenburg v. Ohio bite them on the ass? Stay tuned.

According to the article, the declaration was at 11am. So unless they try to claim the Gov did it unnecessarily just to stop them, I can't see how they'd have a leg to stand on.

Doxxing Nazis is a patriotic duty.

I can't believe people are defending Nazis at DU.

to publicly shame the Nazis who march in public.

If they want to avoid the predictable and entirely justified consequences of their noxious speech, they should go back to wearing white hoods.

belief in white supremacy.

They have no right to expect ME to keep their proclamations private.

If I choose to help them spread around their PUBLIC proclamations, there is nothing wrong with that. I am not revealing anything that is entitled to privacy, I am not revealing anything they didn't purposely make public themselves, I am not revealing anything that they themselves did not actively work to make public.

This terror that we might not be being nice enough to self proclaimed white supremacists is ridiculous.

written above their faces. If they have kids (doubtful from the looks of them), post their pics at their kids' schools.

They might think they're proud of themselves, but let's see what their neighbors, employers and the parents of their children's schoolmates have to say about that.

They've been emboldened by tRump and his racist pals. Let's give them something to fear instead.

dare say "nay"?!

Let's find out where they shop for groceries, too! I say we follow them, find out what products they buy, and then CALL THOSE COMPANIES to let them know WE WON'T BE BUYING THEIR CEREAL AND HOT DOGS ANYMORE, NOSIREE, BOB!

Oh, this is going to be FUN!

I do want to avoid doing business with, hiring, working with and especially having my kids hang out at the homes of known racists. Social shunning is pretty much my "red line", and it's actually very effective.

looks a lot like the cave.

World War II was a clarifying moment wrt how civilization and Nazis are destined to interact.

Just utterly moronic. Ask Brianna Wu how it turns out when people get doxxed. Go ask abortion providers and the families of abortion providers who were killed how that works out.

Look at most any thread here on why it's a bad idea to turn over voting records to the Trump misadministration's voter "fraud" commission.

Doxxing people is dangerous and stupid and there is a good reason DU doesn't allow posting people's personal information.

Thanks for your input though.

Isn't the point of attending a political march to publicly proclaim your position?

That's the entire point--to wound the enemy, to drive them from the public sphere, to hound them, to make the price of being a Nazi so high they keep silent and cower in shame.

Best case scenario is they stop marching and voting and take up other pursuits, such as opioids or meth.

It's war without violence. They are not to be debated but rather defeated.

You cant really complain when someone outs you for it.

Many, if not most, of them are out of the closet as white supremacists. They use social media.

https://twitter.com/hashtag/GoodNightAltRight?src=hash

I've seen at least 2 ids. No I won't post names, their sin is their problem.

I just wonder if these people even care about being outed?

On what grounds?

Let's look at Friday night. Walking (not marching. I went through boot camp, and I know the difference.) up the Lawn in a group, while chanting slogans and carrying lit tiki torches, is a protected activity. So far, this is exercising freedom of speech and peaceably assembling.

Do you really want people fired or expelled from school for exercising their First Amendment rights? You miss the Stasi that much?

Swinging lit tiki torches at people? That's different. Now you're getting into the unlawful assembly part of the equation. But that came later.

Please include me out of your glorious people's republic, comrade. There's no room for me there.

Full disclosure: I went to George Mason Elementary School. It's named after the guy who wrote the Bill of Rights and who declined to sign the Constitution because it did not include a bill of rights.

If you recognize someone from these pics - a relative, a friend, a neighbor, a co-worker, a customer - you know what you need to do. Not publicize their name, necessarily, but your nazi nephew shouldn't get to sit at the same Thanksgiving table as you, or get invited to important events. Your nazi friend should no longer be your friend. Your nazi neighbor should no longer get to borrow sugar or the lawnmower. Your nazi co-worker or nazi customer should get a professional treatment - but no more. No chit-chat, no extra help, nothing but cool politeness and only necessary interaction.

As Miss Conduct at the Boston Globe wrote recently, we get to draw the line at nazis, actually. We do get to cut them out of our lives, and "should [they] decide to de-Nazify [themselves] at some point, [they] can be welcomed back into the fellowship of the decent." If we trust them ever again, that is.