Rising fascism in the US

Your right, it's not healthy how those on the extreme left want to censor speech they don't like. Maybe they should spend more time learning about the US Constitution and less about how the Founding Fathers were evil slave owning racists...

I guess they'll get used to it. But the University should also find a room easier to secure for these things.

Funny how those banging on about free speech only care about Nazi's free speech, what about jihadis, supporters of regimes in N Korea, Cuba, Venezuela? Why aren't they being invited to address the crowds?

It's quite human that someone wants to protect those he likes more than others.

I support free speech for all. I would be just as upset seeing a speaker supporting the Muslim Brotherhood, or the head or PETA or any other group. If there is a group of students who invite a speaker, the speaker should be allowed to speak.

Free Speech protects speech that is offensive or unpopular; the same laws that protected abolitionists, and early proponents of same sex marriage, and anti-war speakers (all of these are viewpoints that have been both unpopular and offensive)... now protect the Alt-Right, Islamicists and both sides of the Israel debate.

The problem currently is that the political left is doing the censoring. I haven't heard of any leftist speaker being banned from campus.

Free Speech is Free Speech. I support it as a basic right for everyone, whether I agree with their ideology or not.

Another phenomenon is wanting to even the field of play when one team has an unfair advantage.

I agree, it is a dangerous road when people start deciding who can speak and what they can speak about. (Unless of course it is about violence or in some way jeopardizes safety.)

You probably never heard of leftist being banned at universities, because I am not sure what university is even considered conservative much less a controversial leftist wanting to speak at one.

Ben Shapiro is a Nazi?

You guys are diluting the term to nothing, sorta like the Clinton campaign did to sexist.

There's nothing remotely dangerous about banning hate speech. Hate speech is used by the powerful to persecute and malign the weak and vulnerable. Protecting free speech was intended to hold to powerful to account, America's fetishisation of free speech does the opposite.

Hate speech should not be afforded the protection of free speech. Any position taken to an extreme is wrong, and protecting hate speech is about as extreme as one can get.

Who decides what is hate speech and how is it punished? It is a dangerous slope ripe for abuse depending on the times and the mood of the country or locality. (My opinion and pretty well staunch belief. )

If you need hate speech defining there's not a lot of hope. It's fairly obvious, anything that promotes hate towards a group or individuals, usually minorities.

We do fine over here, and it's certainly preferable to allowing Nazis to march and murder people. Now that really is a slippery slope.

1. Define hate speech.
2. Make sure the people accused are actually guilty of hate speech.
3. Define Nazi.
4. Make sure each person you call a Nazi meets the criteria.
5. Define 'alt right.'
6. Be responsible not to sling that identifier out on anyone who hasn't demonstrated their belonging to it.

The establishment Dem amalgam has been hiding behind a multitude of baseless, inciting accusations wrapped in cowardly name-calling.

I've heard Milo Yiannopolous speak. I've never heard him use hate speech.
No one else has given evidence of hate speech by him.

Can anyone give me evidence of hate speech by Ben Shapiro? Is he a Nazi? Is Milo? What makes s person a Nazi, and what public figures are Nazis? Is Trump a Nazi?

"In June 2017, the Supreme Court affirmed in a unanimous decision on Matal v. Tam that the disparagement clause of the Lanham Act violates the First Amendment's free speech clause. ... Effectively, the Supreme Court unanimously reaffirms that there is no 'hate speech' exception to the First Amendment."

Wiki

The only speech cited in googlesphere that is not protected is speech that incites immediate violence.

"Shoot her." "We should kill that guy." "Let's beat the **** outta him."

Mostly antifa comments.

I disagree but, no need to go on and on. You like your country and I like mine, we both just don't like who is running them right now, huh?

There is a difference in making laws prohibiting certain kinds of speech and commenting or describing the speech they are hearing. People are allowed to form their own judgements and voice them out loud.

I have never heard or listened to the ones you are referring to so I wouldn't know. However, some call themselves alt-right. Pretty sure Bannon did.

I think people here who are bold enough to use the terms are responsible to stand by their accusations with proof.

As though any of you would accept it? Snood did just that and it wasn't accepted.

I haven't finished listening to Ben Shapiro, but I'm leaving it here for anyone who's interested in knowing what they're talking about re conservative speakers at Berkeley.

https://youtu.be/Ae4VZTVEFC4

Ben Shapiro.

Must be on a different thread...and his own opinion of terms rather that legal or universally accepted definitions.

why not? I think the USSC got it right. If speech calls for criminal acts or incites (directly) criminal acts, then its defined by felony laws.
"hate Speech" opens up to counter hate speech. All the "taking up of sides" is merely political tribalism.

I dont wanna live in a nation like N Korea. I want the ability to call the president whatever I wish and decry his many many shortcomings and practices in song and verse.