Commentator on Fox News Made Statement That Hate Speech is Not Protected: Actually, It Is, Because the Constitution Makes It So

Before I go one step forward, I totally condemn the  violence that took place this morning in Virginia.  I also  condemn the white supremacists for holding this rally in the first place.   This kind of violence has no place in our society.

Using a car to mow down people you disagree with?   Give me a break!  I’d also like to point out that blacks and whites were both mowed down by this unthinking individual.

I’ve been a vocal opponent of the white supremacist movement in years past and renew that commitment to hold them to account.  

I got into an argument on this blog back in April 2006 with a neo-Nazi, and have included a couple of the links below.

https://thunderferret.blogspot.com/2006/04/big-trouble-neo-nazis-may-crash-city.html

https://thunderferret.blogspot.com/2006/04/neo-nazi-comments-on-this-blog.html

I had commented that the Noise Blockade and diversity festival being held in the city of Lansing would have thousands of people there, while the neo-Nazi turnout would be far below expectations.   He was laughing that “thousands” wouldn’t show up and that they’d have two hundred white supremacists there.  In actuality, 1,700 people showed up at the counter-rally while only 75 neo-Nazis (out of 200 predicated) bothered to show up.   They decided not to crash the diversity festival and stayed in the Capitol grounds.

Now, having said all that, a commentator on Fox News this afternoon said that hate speech is not protected speech.  Um, yes it is, as it is written in the Constitution of the United States and upheld by the United States Supreme Court. 

I believe what the commentator meant to say but fell short on is that inciting to riot is NOT protected speech, as decided by the Court in Brandenburg vs. Ohio (1969).

As detestable as hate speech is, it is protected speech, so long as it doesn’t incite riots and violence.  In other words, they had a right to protest the removal of a statue dedicated to Robert E. Lee, but not to physically hurt people.  Likewise, the counter-protesters had every right to be there to demonstrate in favor of removing the statue.

I’m also getting the impression that something else is going on with the other side who participated in the violence.  Apparently they call themselves “Antifa.”   From what I could tell in the videos I’ve seen, they physically blocked the neo-Nazis from advancing into the park in Charlottesville, which lead to the violence.   This “antifa” group shouldn’t have gotten physically involved as they played right into the neo-Nazi group’s hands.  The neo-Nazis appear to have come looking for a fight with batons, riot shields and some kind of spray that they used.  

I think that’s why the President responded with his blaming both sides for the violence.  It takes two to make a fight.   He’s getting blasted by everybody, but I think he’ll be proven correct.

Don’t know what this “antifa” thing is, but I’m going to find out.   I think I heard that term last year too, when they were blamed for attacking Trump’s supporters during the election.  I didn’t think much of it—just left-wing kooks stirring stuff up.

There was once a time when protesters and counter-protesters could yell at each other without resorting to violence.  If those days are gone, we might all come to regret the loss of civility, even when counter-protesting the hate message of the KKK and neo-Nazi barbarians.