Hate Speech Public Consultation

irishproduce

RandomName2 wrote: »

Politics by definition is about public affairs. If you have already taken it as accepted that something is going to be a public affair, but don't want it to become political, what options are you left with?

One option would be some sort of public consultation model where citizens get a direct say on the motion set about by the government. While this approach is great in that it effectively negates any reason for anti-migrant politicians or parties to emerge (because why go out for a political party hamburger when you have direct say steak at home) it does have one massive downside. It is possible that the public might have a different opinion to your own.

The other way is to try and shut down discussion of the matter. If politicians or organizations can be effectively ostracized, and possibly gagged by more restrictive speech laws, then there won't be a medium for discussion, and consequently there can't be any political movement at all. :rolleyes:

The government and media were very quick to say that both Sean Casey and Noel Grealish were racist concerning their comments about traveler housing and Nigerian expatriation of money respectively. This was the charge leveled at them: that it didn't matter if they were right (Noel Grealish, at least, was apparently wrong in the matter), but that their comments were racist in nature, and shouldn't have been made for that reason. Perhaps hate speech legislation could help penalize politicians and would-be politicians, who act in this manner in future?

Excellent post. Thanks.

sabat

irishproduce wrote: »

You know, I had a think about this. If that same UN delegate instead said, that there is an abnormally low number of NGO groups in Ireland, RTE would have it on the news as something along the lines of "UN Delegate shocked at poor representation of minority rights due to low number of NGOs " or something pushy like that.
Gas that Rte Don't bother highlighting the extraordinary number of NGOs set up here.
Good spot, poster.

Can they not even see how having an African woman speak at an international forum, saying "we" while referring to actual Irish people with a patently false version of our history, might rub people up the wrong way? Is this the metric of nationality and ethnicity now? Hearing about a place on another continent to which you have zero connection with a soft-touch welfare system and insidious NGO complex and just show up?
That woman is not Irish. That's not hate speech; it's reality.

peddlelies

Really worries me that people will jump to defend proposals like this with the same auld shíte excuses like "It won't be the same as other countries", when they know full well it will be. This might sound harsh but imo they are conniving, power hungry, and have zero acceptance of opposing views. Imo deep down they aren't good people, all they want is power because they seem themselves morally and intellectually superior and will relish the fact they have control over others.

Wibbs

sabat wrote: »

Can they not even see how having an African woman speak at an international forum, saying "we" while referring to actual Irish people with a patently false version of our history, might rub people up the wrong way? Is this the metric of nationality and ethnicity now? Hearing about a place on another continent to which you have zero connection with a soft-touch welfare system and insidious NGO complex and just show up?
That woman is not Irish. That's not hate speech; it's reality.

It could well be "hate speech" soon enough S. If you were to utter this blasphemy on a primetime slot you'd get some measure of stick from the foghorn holders eager to protect their patch and definitions of "reality". So according them she has a newly minted passport, therefore that makes her just as Irish as the GAA and it's perfectly valid to wheel her out as an Irish woman with a firm grasp of our ethnic history and culture. My arse it's valid.

Shall we have an oul look at the dictionary definition of ethnicity?

a large group of people who have the same national, racial, or cultural origins, or the state of belonging to such a group:

Does she have the same Irish national, racial, or cultural origins? Not even close. Out of that lot her only "belonging to a group" is by the offices of a passport, a passport that if it's ten years old I'd be surprised. And given that today since things have been tightened way up since the heady days of the boom and Africans along with Georgians and Albanians have nearly 100% of their applications to stay here rejected, the chances are bloody high she wouldn't get in today to claim her "Irishness". G'way to feck.

Again I note that when this "I'm Irish and you better believe it, or else you're a Wacist!!!" stuff comes up, it's almost always from darker skinned folks and usually Africans, you don't hear it nearly so much from lighter skinned Poles, Italians, Spaniards, Russians, Czechs, Latvians et al, even folks from the Middle East and China, no matter how long they've lived here or what passport they carry.

Now imagine if a White Irish origin woman showed up to the UN as part of a Sudanese NGO delegation to talk about that nation and started to lecture the hallowed halls on her Sudan and her history and ethnicity as a Sudanese women after ten years living there? She'd be bloody well laughed out of it and rightfully. A few would likely be calling her racially insensitive with it. Yet apparently the Irish are supposed to listen to this usual multiculturalist utter scutter and buy into it? G'way to feck Part Two the sequel.

Bobblehats

What’s worrying too is that those who make the most noise will be made a representative speaker of these groups or parties regardless. And we know where they tend to eminate from but I’m mortified to see us a laughing stock in the court of the UN.

They are clearly overwhelmed by sheer amount of Irish NGO’s reporting racism. If it’s already proving such an unprecedented failure here should we not shut up shop; take stock and try work to with what we’ve got. Abandon project, before we have to cordon the area off as a disaster zone completely because that’s anything to go by the sheer incompatibility is proving all too apparent on a scale like no other and it will just blow up in our faces. Who’d want to spite their own face like that?!

Dick_Swiveller

peddlelies wrote: »

Really worries me that people will jump to defend proposals like this with the same auld shíte excuses like "It won't be the same as other countries", when they know full well it will be. This might sound harsh but imo they are conniving, power hungry, and have zero acceptance of opposing views. Imo deep down they aren't good people, all they want is power because they seem themselves morally and intellectually superior and will relish the fact they have control over others.

But the people you speak of also rely on an army of truncheon wielding, uneducated snowflakes to enforce the latest PC diktat. It's already dangerous to express certain opinions online for fear of losing your livelihood.

What will it be like when the army of 'flakes have this repressive law to back them up?

Eric Cartman

Dick_Swiveller wrote: »

But the people you speak of also rely on an army of truncheon wielding, uneducated snowflakes to enforce the latest PC diktat. It's already dangerous to express certain opinions online for fear of losing your livelihood.

What will it be like when the army of 'flakes have this repressive law to back them up?

and theyre the same people that constantly blame our revolving door FF/FG governments for everything and think the government is hurting our lives .....yet want to give them more power.

MadYaker

Will I Am Not wrote: »

Taking all your news from major news outlets owned by multi-billionaires that control what can and can’t be expressed on said outlets is not a great idea to be fair.
Extremely naive to think that there’s no bias in Sky, BBC, RTE etc not to even mention the US organisations.

Where did I say there was no bias? All media sources have bias you just have to have enough brains to see through it. I watch / read all the big American / European news channels. Loads of slant and opiniated bias but plenty of good journalism too.

MadYaker

peddlelies wrote: »

Really worries me that people will jump to defend proposals like this with the same auld sh excuses like "It won't be the same as other countries", when they know full well it will be. This might sound harsh but imo they are conniving, power hungry, and have zero acceptance of opposing views. Imo deep down they aren't good people, all they want is power because they seem themselves morally and intellectually superior and will relish the fact they have control over others.

Where can I voice my opposition to these laws? Is it a public consultation? I agree with with the sentiment that there is a rise of intolerance on the far left. How can we pull people back to the middle ground? People whinge about FF and FG and rightly so, but at least they aren't extremeists.

alastair

Wibbs wrote: »

It could well be "hate speech" soon enough S. If you were to utter this blasphemy on a primetime slot you'd get some measure of stick from the foghorn holders eager to protect their patch and definitions of "reality". So according them she has a newly minted passport, therefore that makes her just as Irish as the GAA and it's perfectly valid to wheel her out as an Irish woman with a firm grasp of our ethnic history and culture. My arse it's valid.

Shall we have an oul look at the dictionary definition of ethnicity?

a large group of people who have the same national, racial, or cultural origins, or the state of belonging to such a group:

Does she have the same Irish national, racial, or cultural origins? Not even close. Out of that lot her only "belonging to a group" is by the offices of a passport, a passport that if it's ten years old I'd be surprised. And given that today since things have been tightened way up since the heady days of the boom and Africans along with Georgians and Albanians have nearly 100% of their applications to stay here rejected, the chances are bloody high she wouldn't get in today to claim her "Irishness". G'way to feck.

Again I note that when this "I'm Irish and you better believe it, or else you're a Wacist!!!" stuff comes up, it's almost always from darker skinned folks and usually Africans, you don't hear it nearly so much from lighter skinned Poles, Italians, Spaniards, Russians, Czechs, Latvians et al, even folks from the Middle East and China, no matter how long they've lived here or what passport they carry.

Now imagine if a White Irish origin woman showed up to the UN as part of a Sudanese NGO delegation to talk about that nation and started to lecture the hallowed halls on her Sudan and her history and ethnicity as a Sudanese women after ten years living there? She'd be bloody well laughed out of it and rightfully. A few would likely be calling her racially insensitive with it. Yet apparently the Irish are supposed to listen to this usual multiculturalist utter scutter and buy into it? G'way to feck Part Two the sequel.

Sad sack racism is sad.

alastair

Dick_Swiveller wrote: »

But the people you speak of also rely on an army of truncheon wielding, uneducated snowflakes to enforce the latest PC diktat. It's already dangerous to express certain opinions online for fear of losing your livelihood.

What will it be like when the army of 'flakes have this repressive law to back them up?

You might consider not indulging in hate speech. Just a thought.

suicide_circus

alastair wrote: »

You might consider not indulging in hate speech. Just a thought.

would you consider not indulging in telling people what they can and cant say? difficult for an authoritarian i know

Ironicname

alastair wrote:

You might consider not indulging in hate speech. Just a thought.

And yet I am still waiting what you define as hatred.

alastair

suicide_circus wrote: »

would you consider not indulging in telling people what they can and cant say? difficult for an authoritarian i know

I’m telling no-one what to do. But if you have the choice between criminalisation and not being a dick, it’s a bit of a no-brainer.

...its sole purpose is to protect individuals and communities belonging to ethnic, national or religious groups, holding specific beliefs or opinions, whether of a religious or other nature, from hostility, discrimination or violence, rather than to protect belief systems, religions or institutions as such from criticism. The right to freedom of expression implies that it should be possible to scrutinize, openly debate and criticize belief systems, opinions and institutions, including religious ones, as long as this does not advocate hatred that incites violence, hostility or discrimination against an individual or group of individuals.

suicide_circus

alastair wrote: »

I’m telling no-one what to do. But if you have the choice between criminalisation and not being a dick, it’s a bit of a no-brainier.

the lack of awareness is astounding. what happens if what you think is someday defined as "being a dick" by some crazed power hungry busybody and you are criminalised? youre for the birds man seriously.

alastair

suicide_circus wrote: »

the lack of awareness is astounding. what happens if what you think is someday defined as "being a dick" by some crazed power hungry busybody and you are criminalised? youre for the birds man seriously.

Straw man argument in lieu of actually engaging in the real legislation. How unsurprising.

MadYaker

Wibbs wrote: »

It could well be "hate speech" soon enough S. If you were to utter this blasphemy on a primetime slot you'd get some measure of stick from the foghorn holders eager to protect their patch and definitions of "reality". So according them she has a newly minted passport, therefore that makes her just as Irish as the GAA and it's perfectly valid to wheel her out as an Irish woman with a firm grasp of our ethnic history and culture. My arse it's valid.

Shall we have an oul look at the dictionary definition of ethnicity?

a large group of people who have the same national, racial, or cultural origins, or the state of belonging to such a group:

Does she have the same Irish national, racial, or cultural origins? Not even close. Out of that lot her only "belonging to a group" is by the offices of a passport, a passport that if it's ten years old I'd be surprised. And given that today since things have been tightened way up since the heady days of the boom and Africans along with Georgians and Albanians have nearly 100% of their applications to stay here rejected, the chances are bloody high she wouldn't get in today to claim her "Irishness". G'way to feck.

Again I note that when this "I'm Irish and you better believe it, or else you're a Wacist!!!" stuff comes up, it's almost always from darker skinned folks and usually Africans, you don't hear it nearly so much from lighter skinned Poles, Italians, Spaniards, Russians, Czechs, Latvians et al, even folks from the Middle East and China, no matter how long they've lived here or what passport they carry.

Now imagine if a White Irish origin woman showed up to the UN as part of a Sudanese NGO delegation to talk about that nation and started to lecture the hallowed halls on her Sudan and her history and ethnicity as a Sudanese women after ten years living there? She'd be bloody well laughed out of it and rightfully. A few would likely be calling her racially insensitive with it. Yet apparently the Irish are supposed to listen to this usual multiculturalist utter scutter and buy into it? G'way to feck Part Two the sequel.

So many sweeping generalisations with a slight sprinkling of racism. SAD

What difference does it make to you if she wants to call herself Irish?

alastair

Ironicname wrote: »

And yet I am still waiting what you define as hatred.

Everybody understands what hatred is, just as they understand defamation, assault, slander, affray, etc. This isn’t rocket science.

alastair

MadYaker wrote: »

So many sweeping generalisations with a slight sprinkling of racism. SAD

What difference does it make to you if she wants to call herself Irish?

Not that it matters to the racists how long she’s been here - just look at the ****e Hazel Chu, or Ibrahim Halawa have to put up with from this line of thinking. Born and bred here, and still not Irish enough for the ‘patriots’.

Wibbs

alastair wrote: »

Sad sack racism is sad.

Oh so it's "racism" now to suggest someone born and bred in a completely different culture and country is not Irish beyond their passport? Or is it yet again the skin colour that gets you all twitchy and taking "offence"? If she were a White woman born and bred in Paris with a ten year old Irish passport and questions were raised about her cultural qualifications on how she could speak of the ethnic and cultural history of this country to the UN would that be "racist" to you too? If I lived in France for ten years and gained a French passport would you see me as French? Would you be OK with me representing France at the UN discussing in heavily accented French the French people's need to be inclusive be to French people like me, while lecturing them on their responsibilities? I doubt it. Hell, I bloody well know it.

As usual your authoritarian politic is so plain to see and full of stuff one might reasonably expect to step in if one were to follow a male bovid around a field. I'm also near 100% certain you've more skin in the game that you will admit to. It's also bloody dangerous to leave vague and extremely subjective "offence" legislation into Ireland's legislation precisely because of political positions like yours.

alastair

Wibbs wrote: »

Oh so it's "racism" now to suggest someone born and bred in a completely different culture and country is not Irish beyond their passport? Or is it yet again the skin colour that gets you all twitchy and taking "offence"? If she were a White woman born and bred in Paris with a ten year old Irish passport and questions were raised about her cultural qualifications on how she could speak of the ethnic and cultural history of this country to the UN would that be "racist" to you too? If I lived in France for ten years and gained a French passport would you see me as French? Would you be OK with me representing France at the UN discussing in heavily accented French the French people's need to be inclusive be to French people like me, while lecturing them on their responsibilities? I doubt it. Hell, I bloody well know it.

As usual your authoritarian politic is so plain to see and full of stuff one might reasonably expect to step in if one were to follow a male bovid around a field. I'm also near 100% certain you've more skin in the game that you will admit to. It's also bloody dangerous to leave vague and extremely subjective "offence" legislation into Ireland's legislation precisely because of political positions like yours.

No scare quotes needed. It’s racism.

it's almost always from darker skinned folks and usually Africans

MadYaker

I watched the video and I have absolutely no problem with it. My life is complicated and I have far bigger things to get my knickers in a twist about, I suppose I envy you really. Must be nice. I can't believe tomorow is Monday.

alastair

MadYaker wrote: »

I watched the video and I have absolutely no problem with it. My life is complicated and I have far bigger things to get my knickers in a twist about, I suppose I envy you really. Must be nice. I can't believe tomorow is Monday.

You’re clearly not a sad sack racist. That’s the special sauce needed,

Wibbs

MadYaker wrote: »

So many sweeping generalisations with a slight sprinkling of racism. SAD

What difference does it make to you if she wants to call herself Irish?

The difference is when she publicly comes out with nonsense about the culture and history of a nation she clearly hasn't a bloody clue about being egged on by NGO vested interests. Just like if someone wants to transition from male to female, I will respect their wishes to be addressed in their gender choice and will do so, but I will not ignore reality and personally see them as a biological woman, and I sure as hell would object if they were to show up to the UN Council of Women and lecture them on what it is to be a woman. Then again we have trans women bating the sh1te out of women athletes in various sporting events and the same "right on" morons are cheerleading that, so up is apparently down nowadays.

I'll ask the question again: Would you be perfectly fine with a Ms Sinead O'Paddy of the red hair and freckles born and bred in West Clare representing Sudan as a Sudanese African woman while lecturing them on their culture and responsibilities? Would that be perfectly normal?

sabat

alastair wrote: »

You’re clearly not a sad sack racist. That’s the special sauce needed,

How can someone be racist if, as you are contending, there is no such thing as race? You might be getting some personal satisfaction out of smugly patronising dissenters here with asinine non-sequiturs, but if you took your head out of your arse for a minute you might want to consider where all this is headed, with particular regard to what will happen when the temporary corporation tax receipts disappear.

alastair

sabat wrote: »

How can someone be racist if, as you are contending, there is no such thing as race? You might be getting some personal satisfaction out of smugly patronising dissenters here with asinine non-sequiturs, but if you took your head out of your arse for a minute you might want to consider where all this is headed, with particular regard to what will happen when the temporary corporation tax receipts disappear.

Race isn’t a scientific reality, it’s a social construct, and racists are real enough. they’re the sort of idiots who think that a multi-ethnic society is a recipe for going to hell in a handbasket. No idea what you expect to happen down the road, but I’m willing to bet I don’t subscribe to your theories.

Wibbs

alastair wrote: »

No scare quotes needed. It’s racism.

The problem is it's true. The vast majority of those in anything like the public eye claiming a recent Irishness are indeed Black.

MadYaker wrote: »

I watched the video and I have absolutely no problem with it. My life is complicated and I have far bigger things to get my knickers in a twist about, I suppose I envy you really. Must be nice. I can't believe tomorow is Monday.

The problem is M... OK forget the woman herself for a second - it could be anyone, any "race", from anywhere; what she read from her script was a provable nonsense aimed at rewriting history for the vested interests of the multiculturalism politic. It's the thin end of the wedge were realities are ignored, newspeak is in play and now we have legislation coming behind it to nail that newspeak down and it will be highly objective in its accusations. Any public dissent from the script can be viewd as "hate speech" Offensive and prosecuted.

The universal declaration of human rights written up in the aftermath of a war which trampled on most if not all:

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

Oh but we might say; well that's ok until it butts up against the individuals feelings. But for the craic let's look at another article from the same document:

Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

OK M, let's say you're a devout Christian, Muslim or Jew. Your faith preaches that being Gay is immoral, repugnant, a sin and abomination against your God and faith. You're not suggesting stoning Gay folks in the street, but you state what is contained within your faith. Now I think that is bollocks, I'm quite sure you do too, but that right there could very easily be seen as "hate speech" against Gay people. If the blasphemy law were still in play(another nonsense) that could be an interesting day in court.

Are there hateful people with hateful opinions M? Damn right there are. Racism is defo high on that list and one of the big reasons why multiculturalism comes with a lot of negatives, especially for the non local folks even many generations in. Do I condone such opinions? No, but I do believe they have a fundamental right to hold them, right up to the point where a fist crashes into a face. Then all bets are off. Having such actually hateful people and opinions is part of the price we pay for a free culture and free ideas. The price of hearing bad opinions as well as bloody good ones.

Like I have said before every single human right you and me hold dear and obvious was once held as a hope by a tiny minority of people out of step with the culture, a culture that always thinks it's getting it right, this time, and most people think ah sure well why bother it doesn't affect me. This is why freedom of thought and speech is so bloody important. In every single example of any totalitarian state and ideology anywhere and when their first act was to remove that right from the people. Any ideology, no matter how well intentioned, that attempts to do so is one to be fought and fought hard, because it's a bad road to go down.

collywobble7

alastair wrote:

No scare quotes needed. It’s racism.

You Sir are a moron

MadYaker

collywobble7 wrote: »

You Sir are a moron

What a stellar contribution to the discussion. Groundbreaking!

Beasty

sabat wrote: »

Could you at least offer some fair disclosure and confirm that you work for an NGO involved in immigration/asylum and are, to some extent, talking from your pocket?

Snake Plisken wrote: »

I was just going to post the same, he/they is clearly working for one of these NGO's!

All posters on this site have the right to keep any information like this confidential

If a poster wishes to disclose an interest that is entirely up to them, but please keep to the topic and do not discuss other posters and what they may, or indeed may not, do for a living

Any questions PM me - do not respond to this post in-thread