Why this is important:

Stew Peters is a far-right virulently anti-LGBTQ bigot who regularly uses his nightly “The Stew Peters Show” program, speeches, and social media accounts to promote white nationalists and antisemites and to spread wild conspiracy theories, bigotry, and calls for violence. Despite his bigoted views and unhinged rhetoric, Peters regularly manages to get Republican leaders, elected officials, and candidates for office to appear on his program. In addition, Peters has participated in ReAwaken America events alongside various Trump insiders and members of the Trump family.

  • @kava@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    32
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    It really depends how you say it. You can say things in such a way where you’re covered under free speech. For example

    Telling a mob to “go over there and attack all the dirty [racial group] to cleanse our city” is 100% incitement and you will go to jail, regardless of who you are

    But going onto your podcast and saying “man, I really think the best thing for our society would be to get rid of all the dirty [racial group] so we can be cleansed” is protected under free speech

    It really depends on what the man who’s the topic of the OP said, to determine whether he said something illegal or not.

    Keep in mind they tried to fight fascism in Germany too. They sent Hitler to jail. Eventually he got broken out and he became dictator shortly after. I think ultimately speech and hatred is not the problem - it’s the symptom. As long as we have people suffering under an economic system that doesn’t provide for all their basic needs, we leave the door open for people like Trump or Prager to sneak in and offer a solution.

    Can censor, arrest, and deplatform all you want, won’t make a difference.

    • ripcord
      link
      fedilink
      211 year ago

      Telling a mob to “go over there and attack all the dirty [racial group] to cleanse our city” is 100% incitement and you will go to jail, regardless of who you are

      I’m very, very much not convinced that last part is true.

      • @nilloc@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        81 year ago

        It got even narrower in [im terrible with case names]

        The Supreme Court basically said unless there is imminent harm, it is free speech. Which is nuts when stochastic terrorism is rampant.

      • @kava@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        -11 year ago

        At least in the US, speech is a protected right. So protected that it’s actually the first part of the bill of rights. So naturally, any limitations on speech must be limited. This changes from place to place. For example in Europe you don’t have such strong speech protections so something like showing a Nazi flag can get you years in prison.

        Having said that, I think speech is one of the very few things that the US actually does better than Europe. While it may allow for people to say obscene hateful things, I believe it is dangerous to give the government the power to interpret what is valid and non-valid speech. Right now the government, while having many problems, is more or less reasonable. It doesn’t take much imagination, however, to envision a future where a couple radical strongmen politicians (or even just one) fundamentally changes the nature of the federal government to a point where any dissent can be considered “hateful”

        I say “white families have 10x higher net worth on average than black families” and all of a sudden it’s a hateful statement because some government official claims I’m trying to guilt all white people. I go to jail or otherwise get censored.

          • @kava@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            51 year ago

            It wasn’t a criminal charge so he never was at risk of going to jail. He got sued for defamation.

            Defamation must involve someone making a false statement of fact publicly — typically via the news media — and claiming that it’s true. An opinion can’t be defamatory. The statement also must have done actual damage to someone’s reputation.

            The parents suing Jones say his lies about their child’s death harmed their reputations and led to death threats from Jones’ followers.

            Essentially if he had said “I think sandy hook was a hoax” he would have been fine. I think the judge also wanted to make an example out of him, given the nature of his statements.

      • @kava@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        61 year ago

        yeah the historical record isn’t great on this. I think Trump has realized he is at the point of no return. he’s crossed the rubicon. at this point unless he wins this election he’s going to jail for the rest of his life.

        pushing an animal into a corner makes them desperate. i think he will attempt to take over the government or die trying. it’s a very precarious position and the future is uncertain

        • DudeBoy
          link
          fedilink
          English
          41 year ago

          Yep. But what else can be done? If we don’t stand up and show them that we will not tolerate facists and we will prosecute them from their crimes, they will keep trying to weasel their way into elected positions.

          At the end of the day, standing up for our democracy is of utmost importance. Even when they threaten us, we HAVE to stick to our ideals.

          I believe if we got through the 60s without a violent uprising, we’ll do it again today. We just have to show our strength. Facists rarely have the balls target the strong and organized.

          • @kava@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            3
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Yep. But what else can be done?

            Like I said in the previous comment in this thread, there’s only one thing we really can do. As long as there is this constant economic insecurity in the majority of the population, we will have growth of fascists. You can lock them up, censor them, beat them up, whatever. They will still grow and multiply.

            This is the unfortunate nature of humanity. When people are insecure, they tend to lash out onto others. This works both on a personal level and a societal level. It’s not a coincidence the Nazis came to power after a period of hyperinflation in the 1920s and then the Great Depression immediately after.

            I support radical large scale economic reforms. Sort of a New Deal type of thing. Coincidentally, that happened around the growth of fascism last century. Back during that time period we were seeing Nazi rallies in NYC with thousands of people attending. Around that same time period we also saw a socialist/communist candidate for president get over a million votes 3rd party.

            Economic insecurity leads to radicalism - in both directions. Who wins first can be a bit random. But generally, people who are more brutal win. Look at the Spanish Civil War. Corporate greed is going to nose-dive our country. We can’t seem to think further than the next financial quarter statement or the next election.

            If we don’t stand up and show them that we will not tolerate facists and we will prosecute them from their crimes, they will keep trying to weasel their way into elected positions.

            They will try forever. That is the nature of democratic systems. It’s eternally vulnerable to these types of people.

            • They will try forever. That is the nature of democratic systems. It’s eternally vulnerable to these types of people.

              Which is why it is important to get out and vote at every opportunity and vote on every race. They will be looking for ways to get in through the cracks at every chance they can. Democracy demands eternal vigilance from its people.

          • @kava@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            11 year ago

            guilty or not doesn’t really matter here. i’m not saying we don’t jail him either, but just because something is the right thing doesn’t always make it the right thing. if that makes any sense

            if you have the right of way and decide to go through that intersection consequences be damned, some of the time you’re gonna get hit by someone who doesn’t care about traffic laws

            you’re right - but you’re dead

            trump broke the law. but arresting him and not letting him flout our laws may end up causing more damage due to unforeseen consequences.

            i’m not saying this is actually the case, but it’s something to consider. and i’m sure the prosecutors in all of these cases have had some serious counsel from officials high up in the federal government

            it’s all uncertain and all paths are dangerous. who knows what’s coming next, honestly. my hope is the guy just has a stroke and the momentum he’s been building since 2016 peters out. i don’t think there’s another contender that can do what he’s currently doing

      • What’s the alternative? Saying that politicians are free to rig an election, then stage a coup, and if it doesn’t work you just get to walk away?

        Not prosecuting Nixon was the biggest mistake this country made (hyperbole), and you can draw a straight line from that to where we are now.