The Leith Nazis: To Zone Them Out Or Not To Zone Them Out

[Major-Tom]

I mean, the way they were evicted is perfectly legal, and kinda understandable.

[Drittes Deutsches Reich]

The difference is, "blacks" do not unilaterally want to act violently against all "non-blacks", whereas neo-Nazis do. Therefore, to evict neo-Nazis is a form of retaliatory violence, and hence is justified, whereas to evict all "blacks" is initiatory violence, and hence is not justified.

That said, the town should have evicted them outright, specifically because of what they are; not gone the coward's way of evicting them because of some petty detail the neo-Nazis overlooked.


Which is exactly why people who want to piss on the rights of others need to be stripped of their own. They don't deserve the protection of the state if they themselves act in initiatory violence against others.

They unfortunately did not have that recourse. You cannot evict people for their political beliefs.

I can evict them for being violent, though. Racism qualifies as violence, therefore evicting racists is justified (though still a bad solution - it's like cleaning your garden by dumping the trash in the one nextdoor).

Obviously, since they've used legal means to expel them in the first place.

What's more interesting (and less obvious) to discuss is whether they have the moral right to expel them, and why.

Yes, they did. Because the Nazis were literally brandishing guns at them.

Which would justify action against the neo-Nazis, but not against anyone and everyone who doesn't have/doesn't want running water. Punishing the latter is wrong as a matter of principle, regardless of whether in this specific town all of the latter happened to be of the former as well. Instead, the town should have simply taken direct action against the advocates of racism. See my point?

[FutureAmerica]

It was legal and moral to evict them. Keep neighborhoods safe.

[The Emerald Legion]

And these Nazi's are citizens of the Untied States Of America and are therefore afforded the same rights as everyone else.

What about the rights of the townsfolk not to have Nazis living in their backyard?

You don't actually have that right. Just like the Nazi's don't have the right to not have black people living in their back yard. They can dislike it all they want. They can scream in german, do the nazi salute in their genuine (RE: replica made in taiwan) nazi uniform, and felate a wax statue of hitler all day.

But until they actually do something beyond saying nasty things and just being unpleasant, they're well within their rights to do so.

Of course, the townsfolk are also well within their rights to demand that everyone in town have plumbing. It's a legitimate cause for concern due to hygiene hazards and sickness doesn't stick to one household.

And if it happens to piss off the new guys? So what.

The Leith Nazi's played their hand poorly. The town played theirs well. This has nothing to do with morality.

[Pope Joan]

This sort of thing goes on in rural areas across the country. I saw it happen in Ulysses PA, near the NY State border. Locals there also got together for their own protection. After local businesses had been harassed, they posted armed citizens there for security. When they vandalized cars in Coudersport and ran over pedestrians there, the state police came out in numbers and arrested many on suspicion. The FBI was prepared to act. Eventually the Aryan Nation were forced to sell out and go elsewhere.

Local people do need to work together and look out for their mutual safety.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

We're talking about Nazis here.

And these Nazi's are citizens of the Untied States Of America and are therefore afforded the same rights as everyone else.

I don't know if they are afforded to not comply to new codes or not in the Untied States of America.

I do know everyone has to be up to city code in the United States of America, though.

[Thermodolia]

The planning amendment didn't force anybody out; it just made it more expensive for anybody to build in Leith. It's hardly discriminating against any group, although it's very inconvenient for people who want to move to the area quickly and cheaply.

It is discriminating against the very poor and people who dont want plumbing, is it not?

It is not just that, but the precedent of using the law in a discriminatory manner, which worries me.

If you don't want plumbing move to a different city. It's completely within a town's right to ensure proper sanitation.

[Thermodolia]

I mean, the way they were evicted is perfectly legal, and kinda understandable.

Every town needs plumbing

[Neuwland]

Why should we? They don't do anything it's only like a dozen people.

[FutureAmerica]

Let them move to Alaska and live next to sarah palin.

[The Rich Port]

This sort of thing goes on in rural areas across the country. I saw it happen in Ulysses PA, near the NY State border. Locals there also got together for their own protection. After local businesses had been harassed, they posted armed citizens there for security. When they vandalized cars in Coudersport and ran over pedestrians there, the state police came out in numbers and arrested many on suspicion. The FBI was prepared to act. Eventually the Aryan Nation were forced to sell out and go elsewhere.

Local people do need to work together and look out for their mutual safety.

Source.

http://www.bradfordera.com/news/neo-naz ... g4.twitter

I'm convinced, honestly. White supremacist groups should all be labeled terrorist groups and hunted down. Not to mention the goddamn KKK, which I don't know how they're not all locked up in Guantanamo Bay.

[The Liberated Territories]

It is discriminating against the very poor and people who dont want plumbing, is it not?

It is not just that, but the precedent of using the law in a discriminatory manner, which worries me.

If you don't want plumbing move to a different city. It's completely within a town's right to ensure proper sanitation.

Ah, the good old If You Don't Like X, Move to Y hypocrisy. Could you imagine any situation (i.e. such as the tenants being too poor, which would go hand in hand not being able to move, much less install basic plumbing) that would make this line of reasoning blatantly idiotic?

What if I told everyone who dislikes the idea of Trump being president to move to Somalia? Would I be correct?

[The Rich Port]

If you don't want plumbing move to a different city. It's completely within a town's right to ensure proper sanitation.

Ah, the good old If You Don't Like X, Move to Y hypocrisy. Could you imagine any situation (i.e. such as the tenants being too poor, which would go hand in hand not being able to move, much less install basic plumbing) that would make this line of reasoning blatantly idiotic?

What if I told everyone who dislikes the idea of Trump being president to move to Somalia? Would I be correct?

And, really, it's so weak it can be used in the opposite.

If the Nazis don't like living in a country that hates their guts, they should fuck off to a country with a military junta. They'll be real happy there, I'm sure, since that agrees with all their politics.

[Hyggemata]

This seems like a perversion of the law. Refusing to associate is good and all but if it were the opposite way around (Nazis forcing out black tenants via a law requiring them to have plumbing) there would be howling at the roof. I cannot condone the method used here to attempt to evict Cobb.

I don't see why not. Plumbing is an essential thing in any modern house, and even Nazis should endeavour to have plumbing.

On the other hand, the black tenant issue is rather different. There are statutes prohibiting towns from discriminating on the basis of skin pigmentation, but there aren't apparently such statutes protecting Nazis.

[The Rich Port]

This seems like a perversion of the law. Refusing to associate is good and all but if it were the opposite way around (Nazis forcing out black tenants via a law requiring them to have plumbing) there would be howling at the roof. I cannot condone the method used here to attempt to evict Cobb.

I don't see why not. Plumbing is an essential thing in any modern house, and even Nazis should endeavour to have plumbing.

On the other hand, the black tenant issue is rather different. There are statutes prohibiting towns from discriminating on the basis of skin pigmentation, but there aren't apparently such statutes protecting Nazis.

It's federal law I think that you can't discriminate against tenants based on their gender, ethnicity, political beliefs, religion, and race.

Which is why the Leith folk were freaking out so much: they had no potential legal recourse to evict the Nazis, which made the take-over of the town somewhat inevitable if they could indeed bus in more people, hence why they had to come up with such roundabout ways to evict them.

Luckily for them, the Nazis took too long... And were stupid.

[Hyggemata]

I don't see why not. Plumbing is an essential thing in any modern house, and even Nazis should endeavour to have plumbing.

On the other hand, the black tenant issue is rather different. There are statutes prohibiting towns from discriminating on the basis of skin pigmentation, but there aren't apparently such statutes protecting Nazis.

It's federal law I think that you can't discriminate against tenants based on their gender, ethnicity, political beliefs, religion, and race.

No. Some political beliefs are tolerable, and others are not.

[The Rich Port]

It's federal law I think that you can't discriminate against tenants based on their gender, ethnicity, political beliefs, religion, and race.

No. Some political beliefs are tolerable, and others are not.

Erm, the Constitution sadly doesn't make that distinction.

To be fair, as long as the Nazis fuck off and leave everyone alone, I'm fine with them practicing their stupid beliefs.

It's when they try to force them on others, in the case of Leith, that I have a problem with it.

[Hyggemata]

No. Some political beliefs are tolerable, and others are not.

Erm, the Constitution sadly doesn't make that distinction.

The constitution does not make plenty of distinctions.

[The Rich Port]

Erm, the Constitution sadly doesn't make that distinction.

The constitution does not make plenty of distinctions.

Which, yeah, that was sort of the point.

There were plenty of subversive dissidents even in the times of the Founders.

They wanted the Constitution to be as wide as possible and clarifications made with Amendments.

[Hyggemata]

The constitution does not make plenty of distinctions.

Which, yeah, that was sort of the point.

There were plenty of subversive dissidents even in the times of the Founders.

They wanted the Constitution to be as wide as possible and clarifications made with Amendments.

I'm quite prepared to end this discussion here, because I don't think the Founders should be allowed to express their opinions on what the constitution means. If they are espoused by someone who is living and think they can stand on their own merit, then let them do so. But I am not inclined to take the dead over the living.

[Trotskylvania]

This seems like a perversion of the law. Refusing to associate is good and all but if it were the opposite way around (Nazis forcing out black tenants via a law requiring them to have plumbing) there would be howling at the roof. I cannot condone the method used here to attempt to evict Cobb.

One doesn't choose to be black.

One chooses to be a Nazi.

The former is an ethnic group. The latter is a totalitarian criminal conspiracy. Democracy is not a suicide pact, and we are under no obligation to treat Nazis like just another shade of tolerable diversity.

[The Liberated Territories]

This seems like a perversion of the law. Refusing to associate is good and all but if it were the opposite way around (Nazis forcing out black tenants via a law requiring them to have plumbing) there would be howling at the roof. I cannot condone the method used here to attempt to evict Cobb.

I don't see why not. Plumbing is an essential thing in any modern house, and even Nazis should endeavour to have plumbing.

On the other hand, the black tenant issue is rather different. There are statutes prohibiting towns from discriminating on the basis of skin pigmentation, but there aren't apparently such statutes protecting Nazis.

The law can very much be perverted to support a group over another. As I said before, what happens to people who are just too poor to install plumbing, like the rural folk of Appalachia, for example? Are the consequences lost on people whose ideal of American life includes every necessity of the middle class, forgetting that some people aren't middle class? If I demanded that say, everyone in Nigeria (a country with very poor access to clean water and sanitation) must have indoor plumbing, and then fine or evict people who don't comply, is this justice? I think it is not.

This seems like a perversion of the law. Refusing to associate is good and all but if it were the opposite way around (Nazis forcing out black tenants via a law requiring them to have plumbing) there would be howling at the roof. I cannot condone the method used here to attempt to evict Cobb.

One doesn't choose to be black.

One chooses to be a Nazi.

The former is an ethnic group. The latter is a totalitarian criminal conspiracy. Democracy is not a suicide pact, and we are under no obligation to treat Nazis like just another shade of tolerable diversity.

Perhaps then, if I lived in a community which banned communists from running on the town council, you would be fine with that, as being a communist is a choice? Or perhaps I should phone my good pal Joe McCarthy, and ask him his opinion?

[Hyggemata]

I don't see why not. Plumbing is an essential thing in any modern house, and even Nazis should endeavour to have plumbing.

On the other hand, the black tenant issue is rather different. There are statutes prohibiting towns from discriminating on the basis of skin pigmentation, but there aren't apparently such statutes protecting Nazis.

The law can very much be perverted to support a group over another. As I said before, what happens to people who are just too poor to install plumbing, like the rural folk of Appalachia, for example? Are the consequences lost on people whose ideal of American life includes every necessity of the middle class, forgetting that some people aren't middle class? If I demanded that say, everyone in Nigeria (a country with very poor access to clean water and sanitation) must have indoor plumbing, and then fine or evict people who don't comply, is this justice? I think it is not.

I don't at all think this is a valid comparison. This is a village in the middle of the USA that we're talking about, not one in Nigeria. Politics is not there to enforce justice, but there to effect what the public wants, that is, what the majority wants.

[Trotskylvania]

I don't see why not. Plumbing is an essential thing in any modern house, and even Nazis should endeavour to have plumbing.

On the other hand, the black tenant issue is rather different. There are statutes prohibiting towns from discriminating on the basis of skin pigmentation, but there aren't apparently such statutes protecting Nazis.

The law can very much be perverted to support a group over another. As I said before, what happens to people who are just too poor to install plumbing, like the rural folk of Appalachia, for example? Are the consequences lost on people whose ideal of American life includes every necessity of the middle class, forgetting that some people aren't middle class? If I demanded that say, everyone in Nigeria (a country with very poor access to clean water and sanitation) must have indoor plumbing, and then fine or evict people who don't comply, is this justice? I think it is not.

One doesn't choose to be black.

One chooses to be a Nazi.

The former is an ethnic group. The latter is a totalitarian criminal conspiracy. Democracy is not a suicide pact, and we are under no obligation to treat Nazis like just another shade of tolerable diversity.

Perhaps then, if I lived in a community which banned communists from running on the town council, you would be fine with that, as being a communist is a choice? Or perhaps I should phone my good pal Joe McCarthy, and ask him his opinion?

I don't know what part of "totalitarian criminal conspiracy" you don't understand. Totalitarian fifth columns have no place in democracy, regardless of whether they style themselves as left-wing or right-wing.