Thoughts on Neo-Nazism (maybe a sign of this becoming a different kind of blog)
As most people would know, I'm Indian, and I take great pride in my heritage. Most people respect that and some actually find it interesting, so long as I don't bring issues back to ethnicity (I apologize for when I do that and I don't need to, which actually can be waaayy too much). Anyways, for a Civics project, I have the topic of the Skokie case. I won't ruin too many details, especially for kids in my class (despite the fact that we are watching a movie based on the case), but it dealt with members of the National Socialist Party of America (which advocates for the same principles as the Nazis did in Germany of socialism and white-, Germanic/Anglo-Saxon-supremacy over all other races, but seeems now to include all white races from Ireland to Spain to Russia) based out of Chicago wanting to march through nearby Skokie, IL, in 1977. The town was picked as an ideal location because of its high Jewish population, and a great deal of the citizens there were either Holocaust survivors or related to Holocaust victims. The town council refused the Neo-Nazis' demand, and a series of cases ensued which managed to bring in the ACLU (on side of NSPA) and the Anti-Defamation League (on side of town). You can research more on your own as to the results, but the basic question is this - whose rights are being violated most? Is it the right for the Neo-Nazis to exercise their 1st Amendment right of assembly and free speech, or is it the right for the Jews of Skokie to live as far as possible from the threats of their past that haunt them to this day?
I did a bit of research on the topic, as well as that of the Neo-Nazi movement within the United States, and I've come to this conclusion (I suggest here that people from my Civics class do not continue reading, as it may sway your opinion when we discuss this and take away from my presentation): It is the necessity for Americans to advocate for everyone's 1st amendment, even if the opinion is one that not everyone shares and can be morally wrong to some people. I've heard liberals who strongly criticize the Bush administration's eclipsing of the 1st amendment also say that Neo-Nazis are abhorrable and should not exist. Well, they should technically have the right to say what they want, but you have as much right to disagree with them. However, you shouldn't try and eclipse their rights to speak, since that's techincally going against the message of the Constitution. THey have the freedom to hate Jews, immigrants, and blacks, whether or not you think its right, and that's a right of theirs that I will defend despite the fact that I strongly disagree with their principles.
As far as what I think about the Neo-Nazi movement, I think that they are a bunch of hypocrites who have their principles skewed in the wrong direction. Why are they hypocrites? They talk big about their Aryan heritage, but they refuse to acknowledge that it was also the Aryans who settled in Iran and the Aryans who brought Hinduism to India. Thus, the Aryans established the base for the cultures of two regions and races that the Neo-Nazi movement publicly hates the migration of to the United States. They preach big about First Amendment rights, but they don't think that minorities and homosexuals should have those rights and cannot be members of the nation. Is that not a contradiction of the First Amendment as well? Lastly, they say that minorities and homosexuals cannot be members of this nation and that their presence destroys the safety of the white majority, yet they don't acknowledge the contributions that members of these communities have made to the rights that Neo-Nazis use daily to advocate for white supremacy.
That was a rant that the 1st amendment grants me, and its the same amendment that grants their right to hate me. To bring this whole thing full circle, Americans should have the right to advocate for what they want and think, and it's the burden of the American people to respect those rights of all people. Neo-Nazis have as much right to say "screw Jews, f*****s, n*****s, and immigrants" as I do to say "screw those racist motherf***ers (sorry, just want to avoid cussing). I hope that this may have sparked the flare of thought and discussion, so feel free to leave your own comments about Neo-Nazis and 1st amendment rights in the comment page. Sorry it was so long, next time I'll try and shorten it.
I did a bit of research on the topic, as well as that of the Neo-Nazi movement within the United States, and I've come to this conclusion (I suggest here that people from my Civics class do not continue reading, as it may sway your opinion when we discuss this and take away from my presentation): It is the necessity for Americans to advocate for everyone's 1st amendment, even if the opinion is one that not everyone shares and can be morally wrong to some people. I've heard liberals who strongly criticize the Bush administration's eclipsing of the 1st amendment also say that Neo-Nazis are abhorrable and should not exist. Well, they should technically have the right to say what they want, but you have as much right to disagree with them. However, you shouldn't try and eclipse their rights to speak, since that's techincally going against the message of the Constitution. THey have the freedom to hate Jews, immigrants, and blacks, whether or not you think its right, and that's a right of theirs that I will defend despite the fact that I strongly disagree with their principles.
As far as what I think about the Neo-Nazi movement, I think that they are a bunch of hypocrites who have their principles skewed in the wrong direction. Why are they hypocrites? They talk big about their Aryan heritage, but they refuse to acknowledge that it was also the Aryans who settled in Iran and the Aryans who brought Hinduism to India. Thus, the Aryans established the base for the cultures of two regions and races that the Neo-Nazi movement publicly hates the migration of to the United States. They preach big about First Amendment rights, but they don't think that minorities and homosexuals should have those rights and cannot be members of the nation. Is that not a contradiction of the First Amendment as well? Lastly, they say that minorities and homosexuals cannot be members of this nation and that their presence destroys the safety of the white majority, yet they don't acknowledge the contributions that members of these communities have made to the rights that Neo-Nazis use daily to advocate for white supremacy.
That was a rant that the 1st amendment grants me, and its the same amendment that grants their right to hate me. To bring this whole thing full circle, Americans should have the right to advocate for what they want and think, and it's the burden of the American people to respect those rights of all people. Neo-Nazis have as much right to say "screw Jews, f*****s, n*****s, and immigrants" as I do to say "screw those racist motherf***ers (sorry, just want to avoid cussing). I hope that this may have sparked the flare of thought and discussion, so feel free to leave your own comments about Neo-Nazis and 1st amendment rights in the comment page. Sorry it was so long, next time I'll try and shorten it.