OMG UPDATE: Like us on Facebook or follow us on Twitter to get updates on updates!

Updated on Thursday, December 24

#23460

OMG:

I'm pretty sure I'll be finishing my degree at Waterloo.

heads up, anyone with a swastika flying out their window can expect a moltov flying in through it.

9 comments

  1. No. This is not justice. If someone wants to put up a swastika in their window it's their right. You're being worse than this person by threatening violence.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Actually, it's arguably NOT their right. Freedom of expression in this country doesn't extend far enough to give you the right to promote hatred of others.

      But violence is never the answer. We have legal channels of recourse in this country, and they (mostly) work.

      Delete
  2. "Violence is never the answer" is bullshit. Cops use violence all the time for their work. Do you think that that is incorrect? Then how would you stop cops from using violence? Legislation? They'd just get better at hiding it.

    Similarly, neo-nazis are generally more likely to be violent. If it comes to dealing with them I will certainly defend myself. If I was jewish I would feel throwing a molotov would be entirely justified, as the entire nazi ideology encourages a violent overthrow of the current order. Fuck them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sorry, it seems I over-generalized.

      I condone use of force - within reason - in order to defend yourself or uphold the law. That's totally fair. So go ahead, if neo-nazi's are attacking you, by all means defend yourself. Fuck those guys, they are literally the worst.

      But throwing a molotov cocktail through somebody's window is not self defense. It's 'attacking first,' which is very, very different. We live in a society where that sort of behaviour puts you on the wrong side of the law.

      And there are other forms of recourse available - legal ones! If you can argue that a swastika in somebody's window is an incitement to violence against a particular group (like Jews, for instance), then they can be penalized for that, and forced to take it down. Those avenues should be pursued first.

      The key distinction here is that this is a pluralist society wherein *holding* a view - even that of a neo-nazi - is perfectly permissible (if somebody were to form "the Canadian Nazi Party," they could do that and even stand for election under that title) - but only insofar as it doesn't cross over into hate speech and incitement to violence. So attack those views in public debate until they do cross that line, and take legal action if they do cross it. Does that make sense?

      Delete
  3. maybe it's the buddhist symbol for eternity, don't judge

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This. It would be ironic though if it was. OP would end up committing a hate crime against people whom he/she thought were committing a hate crime lol.

      Delete
  4. Depends if it's the Nazi version or the Buddhist version. Don't jump to conclusions OP.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Pretty sure if you commit arson you won't be graduating from UW, regardless of how offensive you found the window.

    ReplyDelete