How are fascists treated in your cunt?

He unironically is, no matter how many memes you spout.

I am not even surprised a German/Muslim thinks that the only method to defend socially approved orthodoxy is through violence and disenfranchisement against wrongthink.

Japan is based. I was stationed on Okinawa and their right wing (?) party would drive around just off base in these Toyota HiAce vans all painted up with propaganda blasting Imperial Japanese marching songs like Battotai.
I always wanted to get pictures of them but they didn't really like round eyes gaijins lmao

Don't know any

Okay, this is epic

I'm a fascists and I'm treated pretty good

Attached: 3349757483968475.jpg (499x499, 26K)

>wrongthink

Attached: 1532984328443.jpg (251x242, 37K)

Why should we let fascists have a voice when, if they weren't so weak, they wouldn't give us a voice?

Reminder true fascism has never been tried

> private life exposed, property vandalized and their physical integrity compromised.
Stop being nazi please?

Attached: 1488407691367.jpg (1024x1024, 365K)

Exactly again. We once made the mistake of giving the enemies of democratic republicanism its tools and its protection to overthrow it in the end and we have since learned from this grave error. You simply can't expect the rights and freedoms of an order which you seek to actively overthrow.

Then the same should happen to the people that organised the g8 riots and radical Muslims. But that isnt political opportune, I guess? If people dont commit crimes, you leave them alone. Even if they do, the state has the Monopoly on force so you should at most defend if you are physically attacked or do the citizens Arrest jig.
Otherwise its a free for all and righties might win the direct violence competition on a 1v1 Basis.

They're the third party in the parliament

Glorious Nippon is right again and leftypol trannies can't handle it

He literally cannot. He doesn’t even appreciate the irony of the fact he is espousing fascist ideas and lives in a fascist state.

Look at the post below you, he doesn't even know what the word fascist means.

>why yes I am fascist how could you tell?

Attached: Oswald_Mosley.jpg (483x656, 113K)

Looks he does though, so called "anti-fascist" unironically act like fascists

you cannot abuse a right in such a manner, especially speech. For words do not kill, a word cannot destroy your body. Do not boast a free and democratic society when those who speak contrary to the interests of the government (no matter how wrong they are) have their rights violated

They get painted as virtuous heroes on CNN

There is nothing ironic here at all, dude. Self-preservation is the most basic principle of any complex form of organization. You are arguing that for whatever reason that this principle should not apply to republican and democratic societies. Care to explain why? I'm making a historical argument based on real-world events.

But why tho
Is it because liberal fudgepacking cnn anchors dont like him?

Why do you lot always repeat the same talking points like you're following a call center script?

Only when violence occurs, should violence be a response, sperging out, tipping trash cans and burning property because someone says something contrary to your beliefs (again no matter how wrong they are) is innappropriate. Only when natural rights are violated (life, liberty, and property) via murder, theft, assault, vandalism, etc. should violence be an option. Words, do not do this, unless it is a direct threat of violation of these rights towards a specific individual
Based nippon

This is a the most naive notion on how civil rights actually work. Even the US limits speech that directly threaten its constitutional order.

Refer to my second comment , the only speech that should even be considered to be met with violence is a direct threat. Words otherwise do not "directly threaten the constitutional order" Only in a fascist government is speech against the government forbidden, if it was as you say, would we not be hunting ancom spergs who call for the end of the government and the seizure of property down?

wait im lost what page are you on?

if simply supporting an idea, I repeat: no matter how wrong it is, is illegal, what speech is illegal is up to who is in power

Replace the totalitarian dictator with an unaccountable bureaucracy and the nationalism with globalism and you still have fascism. Ideas contrary to the norms established and protected by the tyranny of experts are punished, and the offenders have no recourse. This is not a free or liberal system or society.

No, he isn't. Fascists are by their nature authoritarian and anti-democratic. If an actual fascist party took power in Canada, do you think they'd protect our democratic institutions? Would they respect our Charter rights? The mainstream parties already don't give a fuck about them, but fascists would do everything to destroy them.

>we can't allow violence or oppression so let's preemptively commit violence in vigilante style street brawls and deplatform people and take away their livelihood and have them live in the street with them families if they don't get with the program but trust me, they are the fascists

Attached: yo.jpg (338x451, 35K)

How do you mean

>so called "anti-fascist" unironically act like fascists
Don't conflate antifa thugs with actually being against fascism.

I think He is baiting, otherwise He might have answered me. I have to work now, though.

*catches the hammer in mid air*

Attached: 1552535342932.jpg (1600x1200, 403K)

>Words otherwise do not "directly threaten the constitutional order"

Except that this is wrong even in the case of the US. If you go on national TV tomorrow and read aloud a list of secret American military bases or any other form of state secret you are behind bars faster than you can say git-mo. Thanks for your naive ramblings.

We allow Nazi's to protest, while calling center right politicians Nazi's.

youtube.com/watch?v=O0zPF-DrXmg

You are arguing for the suppression of ideas you find distasteful, and the repression of those that would dare hold those ideas.

>Fascists are by their nature authoritarian and anti-democratic. If an actual fascist party took power in Canada, do you think they'd protect our democratic institutions? Would they respect our Charter rights?

sounds exactly like antifa then

This dude failed his civics class or is otherwise very uneducated the principle of Defense Democracy is one of the most central pillars of German Constitutional law.

In fact, we even have a Nazi party in the Netherlands that sometimes participates in local elections.
But I don't think they ever won a single seat.

And antifa is a gang of thugs. What does that have to do with being against actual fascists?

>Defense Democracy
dystopian af

You don't enjoy the rights and freedoms of an order you seek to abolish, period.

read this , only when the group in question acts up in a violent manner should violence be an option

Like gods

whistleblowing is illegal, but sometimes whistleblowing is right, but again we are speaking of a radical political group (fascism) expressing their fascistic ideals, so spare me your smugness

I'm not suggesting being violent with them, though. But they shouldn't be allowed in the halls of power no matter what.

>whistleblowing is illegal
So you are agreeing that there are certain limits to speech in order to protect the constitutional order of the state. Thanks, for writing 2 inane posts.

Kotleba is a hero.

Attached: 1488_kotleba.jpg (620x328, 62K)

>human and civil rights are only for me and people like me, not those guys I don’t like

brownshirts and blackshirts, as well as the neonazis of today are thugs, no?

Antifa has mainstream support here, don't trivialize it. Everyone is now considered a fascist if you're not some self flaggelating left wing cuckhold on social issues. That's the problem. so for all intensive purposes I would be considered a fascist even though I have no idea what that actually entails.

Not really. There are a lot of people I don't like but only a tiny fraction of people seeks to abolish human and civil rights altogether.

redpilled
i like germans so much

No, you dolt, I am saying that morality is not equal to law. Can you not read? Just because something is illegal, it does not make it automaticcaly immoral as well. First and foremost, a democratic government should serve the people, not the other way around. In instances such as snowden, such whistleblowing was justified despite being illegal, for it exposed the wrongdoing of government, how they violated the foundational document that they were supposed to be bound by. My second point was that your statement was a red herring seeing as how we are talking about fascists expressing their fascistic ideals

Not very democratic

by this logic communism should be banned

>for all intensive purposes
topkek

Intents and purpose? Fuck English

but a corrupt government can twist the meaning of fascist to prevent opponents from going into power. To ensure a free society, it is a better option to educate the general populace on the values of freedom and teach them why authoritarianism is not beneficial to them

Under these laws the communist party was the first party to be banned in post-war Germany, yes.

even though communism and fascism are both ideologies contrary to the values of individual freedom, freedom of association still exists, as long as the person does not violate the rights of others, they should be free to do as they please

>not really
>I don’t want to repress everyone I don’t like, just some of them!

In the Dutch polls 2 out of the 4 biggest parties have nothing with human rights. And think it's bureaucratic nonsense.

The second party in the Netherlands wants to ban the Islam and take the Dutch nationality of migrants who commit a crime.
Another religious party wants to ban female politicians and female voters.

And now we have an upcoming alt right party that doesn't really believe in international law.

>people who disagree with me shouldn’t be allowed to participate in government

Nippon btfo Germany

Every single democratic government puts limits on the right to assembly for good reasons. Are you starting with your naive and absolutists notions on civil rights again?

The only limits here are health care concerns and disorderly conduct. Political discrimination is illegal here.

@102763433
Not even going to reply to low effort greentext strawmen anymore

to preserve the values of liberty, we cannot violate liberty, repression of nasty ideals does no good, it certainly didn't prevent hitler from rising to power. What does more good is teaching the values of liberty, and allowing all to express themselves, so one can think for oneself and conclude whether an ideology values the individual or not

germany was never and could never be a truly free society though. Even their understanding of democracy is just an authoritarian style of social democracy forced upon them to counter more oppressive systems. Culturally in prussianized modern Germany people with different views cannot coexist peacefully. They will probably turn into a European Turkey soon with enforced authoritarian half-secular, half sharia law, just like they have this postchristian great coalition culture now.

Germans can't have their own opinion it's everyone, or no one.

Nice strawman, more like
>people who, given half a chance, would destroy those government institutions and repudiate the values those institutions are founded upon shouldn't be given the chance to infiltrate those institutions

good reasons is a subjective term, even the kkk is allowed to assemble so far as they do not vandalize, murder, assault, or commit any crime, I have repeated numerous times now: there is no reason to stifle the right of assembly unless a group actively violates the rights of others, your good reasons are far too broad and open to interpretation, and if anything you are the fascist for you value the State above the individual

You're making a lot of sense. Germans are basically the borg.

explains the idiotic drivel of Deutsche user here, how can a government be a democracy if you cannot question or speak out against it

Exactly. It's pure madness, naïvité or some underhanded agenda.

is a concept of a constitution alien to you both? A guideline for the government that limits its powers?

>says the person undermining those very institutions by deplatforming people by default

I laid out my case supported by historical arguments while dispelling naive notions on the interaction of civil rights by finding easy counterexamples while the only guys got is just a bunch of childish insults.

Germany has a long history of far left and far right groups within its country. So their politicians desperately cling to middle and try to censor the rest.
That's why you also have those left wing riots in Germany and actual Nazi's.

We have the opposite. Here we have a long history of people taking in radical stances. And then meeting somewhere in the middle for a compromise. In parliament our politicians also have absolute freedom of speech.

Yes, fascists are well known for respecting the constitutions of democratic governments

>The only limits
Again this is wrong. The Netherlands have several hate speech laws that limit free speech and have been interpreted to indirectly prosecute holocaust denial for example.

Not a straw man at all. Maybe a little reductive, but that isn’t a bad thing and it’s not a straw man.

sounds better, radical ideas should be allowed to express themselves, for example neo nazis, hardline communists, and antifa are allowed to speak their minds here, yet it doesn't take a government to regulate this speech for the general populace to understand that said ideals are either inefficient, destructive, or both

He laid his case too, I will NOT join your borg hivemind and I reject your false dichotomies you fucking borg

When a crisis happens, like the bank crisis in 2013 or MH17, our politicians also give a carte blanche to our government. That politicians won't check their work, so the government can do what it must. And then the policies get evaluated afterwards.

We don't have anti-holocaust laws. We have anti insult laws, which apply to individuals and groups. There was one guy who kept sending educational school books to Jewish schools about how the holocaust didn't exist. That was considered an insult. But denying the holocaust itself is legal.

And in parliament we have absolute freedom of speech.

The lack of self awareness is impressive but disappointing.

here's the point of the constitution of a government, when the government violates the constitution, especially to a point so severe as an authoritarian regime would, violence as a response is appropriate, and as far as I am aware, a majority of NZ is not fascist, so how could there be a democratic takeover, in societies built on liberty, liberty is usually valued