But at the same time, when you deny these admittedly incorrigible and very vocal fringe groups the right to peacefully express their sad, twisted opinions publicly you deny the basic underpinning of what makes democracy so potentially great.

WE are being denied our right to speak back.

Look at what shitgibbons said: "the left caused the violence, the left doesn't want them to speak."

It's interesting that your response was but, but, but, free speech for Nazis. No one is asking for the GOP to disallow free speech.
All that's being asked is for this Republican administration to admit the ideas behind that speech is deplorable. They seem unwilling to do that.

In all the build up by the organizers of the Unite the Right rally "the right to peacefully express their sad, twisted opinions publicly" was not how they advertised it. They wanted violence and thank you antifa for not allowing Nazis to roam the streets of Charlottesville without resistance.

The violence of the so-called antifa movement ( if indeed it is even such) destroyed OCCUPY, that is fact regardless of whether or not you wish to acknowledge that.
Violence plays directly into the hands of the increasingly fascist state, makes progress far less likely and has no place in any movement to restore our democracy.
In my opinion, what you advocate is no violence for the alt right but it is fine for the so-called alt left.
You state, rather dramatically and with a stunning lack of accuracy, that "we" are being denied our right to speak back. The very same position these White Supremacists take, interestingly enough. No, with all due respect for your right to hold an opinion, the violence committed in Charlottesville made the actual message sublimated to the acts of violence.

was a lost cause from the get go. Ideologically well intentioned as it was.

Violence only "plays into the hands of the increasingly fascist state" because Nazi sympathizers are perfectly comfortable with armed Nazis walking through the streets unfettered. The violence of antifa in Charlottesville saved lives. That is from the people who had armed Nazis running towards them and their only protection was not the police but antifa. Perhaps they, too, are inaccurately dramatic.

I advocate for violence by Nazis to be met with the defense of our cities by force. You may choose to turn and have another cheek smashed in with a bat. I choose to stab a Nazi in the neck when they try that. If there were no fascists there would be no anti fascists. Don't be violent and neither will I. So, no, I don't advocate for violence I advocate for defense.

You claim "the violence in Charlottesville made the actual message sublimated to the acts of violence." What message was that? That armed Nazis can do whatever they want? Why are you sympathizing with the views of Nazis? White supremacists wanted to commit acts of violence. That was the intent of their armed militia invading Charlottesville. That was the message you decry me for sublimating

Free speech does not mean you can say or do whatever you want. The ACLU has seen the errors of those ways and will no longer fight for Nazis' right to hold rallies. Nazis want genocide and race wars. That is what they want. You want Nazis to be able to do that. Again why do defend what Nazis want? Just like I don't have the right to yell 'fire' in a crowded theatre nor do I have the right to advocate violence whose end goal is the subjugation of people different than I am.

You fight for the right to hold a peaceful rally the day after Nazis leave. I will fight for the city you do that in to still be standing after the Nazis have left.

Welcome to DU.

Please read this:
http://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0LEVw95N5ZZDK4A.AtXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTByOHZyb21tBGNvbG8DYmYxBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzcg--/RV=2/RE=1503045626/RO=10/RU=http%3a%2f%2fwww.slate.com%2farticles%2fnews_and_politics%2fpolitics%2f2017%2f08%2fwhat_the_alt_left_was_actually_doing_in_charlottesville.html/RK=1/RS=w0zNhMsB.qGT1e_mSGL2kewwXsY-

as well as shallow, sorry to note. The Civil War was long ago, Occupy was not. Nor was its methodology as you portray it either. I do puzzle at your adamant position on violence as well as your embracing it.

I do think a serious discussion about free speech and its limits to be seriously overdue, so we do, after all, have something in common. As a very long time activist, my first appearance at a demonstration was in 1961 in a Ban the Bomb march in Washington DC, and I was directly involved in the often violent antiwar demonstrations of the late sixties and early seventies.

Violence has several results, all of them negative; it plays directly into the hands of the ruling class as their police forces, National Guard units all are far better equipped to commit violence than are we, violence brings a possible further weakening of the Bill of Rights and makes a police state much more likely.
Perhaps the most important issue that turns me against violence is that it turns the public against the perpetrators thereof, and , in a democratic society we need a majority to make progress.

OCCUPY? Racist and anti Semitic acts. You know who doesn't want white people to just discuss the issues of free speech while Nazis commit these acts? African Americans and Jews. Until the victims of white supremacist and Nazi legislation and acts ask me to stand down rather than stand up I will continue to stand with them. It's very good for you to comfortably sit in your 'ivory' tower and babble. It is not very good for the people that are affected by this current republican administration's favoritism of Nazis. Maybe you and Tina Fey can sit at home and eat cake but me and my ilk will go where Nazis go and let them know they are not welcome.

You clearly have no idea what happened in Charlottesville. What you saw was two groups coming together violently like the news has been running nonstop. I saw all the antecedent behavior. I saw the National Guard and Police doing absolutely nothing to protect the innocent citizens of Charlottesville from an armed and organized invasion. Did you read the article of eye witnesses who feared the ongoing Nazi violence? I did not 'embrace' violence. I said defense against violence was necessary. Sometimes that defense takes on a violent tone. "If you don't hit me, I won't hit back." That is not embracing violence, although maybe to you it is, it is defending ones self, and in this case others, from more violence.

I am well versed in the adverse effects of violence. Instead of agreeing with Trump's spin on what happened in Charlottesville and putting Nazis and white supremacists on the moral high ground you could take a minute to understand the events, read accounts of people who were there, and trust their judgment. Your right, in a democratic society we need a majority. I think if the majority understands that fucking Nazis invaded a city in Charlottesville and good people prevented them from committing more violence that fucking Nazis would stop invading cities. Boston today is a case in point. Thousands of peaceful protesters exercised their free speech rights while a hundred or so white supremacists exercised theirs. Of course the police learned a lesson from Charlottesville. The lesson wasn't create a police state and violate everyone's rights. They set up a perimeter and didn't let anyone with weapons into the demonstration area. There wasn't wide spread violence. Let it be very clearly understood: I am not advocating and embracing violence. What I am saying is just because violent acts occurred does not mean all the people engaged are bad. Understand what happened don't just take Trump's word for it.

I am not, again NOT, saying no one can exercise free speech. Me vilifying Nazis, or those who advocate for Nazis, marching in armed bands through the streets of America is not a violation of anyone's first amendment. I am exercising my right to free speech. Nor is it a violation of their free speech if they enact violence, which they did, and I defend myself and others from violence.

You want a conversation start a thread. I believe it would be an interesting topic. If you don't want me to participate know that I understand the irony of not wanting me to express my thoughts in a free speech thread (in all its dark comedic glory).

While I did read your entire and garbled rant I could just as well stopped at this gem:

"OCCUPY? Racist and anti Semitic acts. You know who doesn't want white people to just discuss the issues of free speech while Nazis commit these acts? African Americans and Jews. "

I think you are a very confused, however well intentioned individual you may be. Further, in your anger and angst you completely missed the point which I rose to address.

Enough said.

The issue is violence and how certain types of speech promote , almost guarantee violence. When the antifa children resort to violence, regardless of their self congratulatory addiction to adrenaline fueled anger, they sublimate the message of the left, and, instead of educating the public they cause many to turn away from that message.
There has begun, in some circles, a dialogue on whether free speech has boundaries, and , while I have always been an advocate of said liberty to speak ones mind, it is, I believe, a subject worth pursuing.,