From: egnilges@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Ed Nilges)
Newsgroups: misc.legal,alt.politics.correct,soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Hate Speech Okay, says the Supreme Court
Date: 27 Aug 92 14:48:32 GMT
Organization: Princeton University
Originator: news@nimaster

In article <1992Aug27.002927.29619@midway.uchicago.edu> thf2@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>>>"Ah," the bigot will say, "I used to hate this Albanian, but now the
>>>city council has prohibited anti-Albanian speech, I suddenly feel a
>>>deep love welling within me."
>>
>>That's something like what happened in the American south in the 1960s.
>
>Really?  Name one hate speech law from the 1960s in the American South.

The laws prohibited discrimination; but your cynicism re hate speech law
is nothing more than a consequence of the time-honored right-wing habit
of describing laws of any stripe as ineffectual in changing attitudes, a
description which was tellingly refuted in the American south.

>
>And if you think attitudes have changed so much in the South, then why
>have whites completely left the public school system down there?

"Completely?"  Hardly. The departure, at any rate, is as much
economically based as it is racially based.  Having destroyed their own
schools through refusal to pay enough in taxes to support them, whites
flee the resulting mess.  

I don't claim that attitudes have completely changed in the south, only
that the center of American racism has moved North, partly because of
the effect of civil rights legislation in teaching the south that racism
is wrong.

>
>>Perhaps
>>you'd rather see the deliberate arming of racial factions and incitement
>>to hatred, as is being engineered by white racists in South Africa?
>
>That's a bit of leap, even from the Carl Lewis of logic.

I'll take that as a compliment.  After all, Carl Lewis makes his leaps
using a superbly tuned body after considerable training.  I blush to
have you, in essence, compare my mind to Carl Lewis' body.

>
>Wow, don't let Schmidling see these new codewords for Jews: "scum of
>all developed nations."  (And you have no idea why I reasoned the post
>was anti-Semitic -- it was because the language within the post was
>anti-Semitic, whether it comes from Sherheryar, Henry Ford, Pat Buchanan,
>or Ed Nilges.) 
>
>>If Sherheryar replies
>>with the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, he's wrong
>
>Of course, you use the exact same language as the Protocols of the
>Elders, only without the word "Jew."

A belief that the structures of economic and political life have a
particular tendency, for example towards neo-colonialism, is distinct
from conspiracy theories, whether those that picture a roomful of Elders
of Zion or a roomful of specific capitalists.  On your account, ANY
attempt whatsoever to form a coherent picture of international politics
is a sort of Protocol of the Elders of Zion, and university departments
of politics and economics are exactly equivalent to Nazi think-tanks.
This is absurd.

>
>(As if Said wasn't an anti-Semite, himself...)

Along with Noam Chomsky, I suppose.  Lessee, if one is not a right-wing
Likud supporter then one is an antisemite, whether one is a Jewish
linguist or articulate Palestinian moderate.  Again, Tedster, whyncha
follow Israel's lead and abandon this idiot intransigent posture?  I
know that Chicago's about five years behind the times in most matters,
but really...
>--