EU Immigration Crisis Megathread

[Martinus]

The only story about neonazi attacks in Sweden in 2016 I could find was the story about the "neonazi rampage" in January 2016, which apparently was determined in March 2016 to be a media misreporting hoax:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3477510/Migrant-attacks-conspiracy-hide-truth-Europe-s-liberal-country-Sweden-stopped-citizens-discussing-refugee-influx.html

[Zanza]

In any case, I don't see anything commendable in trying to prevent others from exercising their constitutional freedoms of expression or assembly. Debate them or have your own march on another day to demonstrate your numbers. What she is doing is essentially violence, and starts a slippery slope towards a society where anyone can use physical force to stop others from doing legal things you disagree with.

What physical force is she using. She is standing in the middle of a road.

Reminds me of Mono's stance in the Hong Kong student protests thread a while ago.

[crazy canuck]

Martinus brings up a good point. How often do people like her try to oppose Islamists in the same way? Opposing neo-nazis is safe and easy.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-23241937

You realise you are making our point, right? Malala was shot in the face for doing to Islamists the equivalent of what that "brave woman" did to neonazis.

Edit: Correction. Malala was not actually doing anything to prevent others from exercising their fundamental civil rights. That woman did.

In your world, is protesting against neo nazis a bad thing?

[Martinus]

In any case, I don't see anything commendable in trying to prevent others from exercising their constitutional freedoms of expression or assembly. Debate them or have your own march on another day to demonstrate your numbers. What she is doing is essentially violence, and starts a slippery slope towards a society where anyone can use physical force to stop others from doing legal things you disagree with.

What physical force is she using. She is standing in the middle of a road.

Reminds me of Mono's stance in the Hong Kong student protests thread a while ago.

Apples and oranges. Hong Kong student protesters were protesting the government whilst, presumably, living under a system that denies them the civil right of assembly. Here that woman is protesting another legal protest by fellow citizens.

Incidentally, I am unclear about the details of why she had to be removed by the police - as others said, could not the marchers simply pass her by? But if for some reason the fact that she was standing there physically impeded the ability of the marchers to continue with their legal march, then there is nothing really one should commend her for.

[The Brain]

I don't think "Neo-Nazi" is a necessary term these days. Very few original Nazis are left and they are generally too old for action.

[Razgovory]

The only story about neonazi attacks in Sweden in 2016 I could find was the story about the "neonazi rampage" in January 2016, which apparently was determined in March 2016 to be a media misreporting hoax:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3477510/Migrant-attacks-conspiracy-hide-truth-Europe-s-liberal-country-Sweden-stopped-citizens-discussing-refugee-influx.html

Your inability does not impress me.

[Martinus]

In your world, is protesting against neo nazis a bad thing?

The question is not about who she is protesting against, but how. If her protest effectively prevents other fellow citizens from exercising their civil right of assembly, then it is a bad thing irrespective of whether the people she is protesting against are neonazis, gays and lesbians or pigeon fanciers.

[The Brain]

But Mart, surely the rule of law doesn't protect people in society, especially the ones who are poor or lack other important resources?

[Gups]

In your world, is protesting against neo nazis a bad thing?

The question is not about who she is protesting against, but how. If her protest effectively prevents other fellow citizens from exercising their civil right of assembly, then it is a bad thing irrespective of whether the people she is protesting against are neonazis, gays and lesbians or pigeon fanciers.

I repeat, how does one woman standing stationary on a public highway stop anyone from exercising their rights?

[The Brain]

AFAIK the demonstration had a permit to use that stretch of road at that time.

[Martinus]

In your world, is protesting against neo nazis a bad thing?

The question is not about who she is protesting against, but how. If her protest effectively prevents other fellow citizens from exercising their civil right of assembly, then it is a bad thing irrespective of whether the people she is protesting against are neonazis, gays and lesbians or pigeon fanciers.

I repeat, how does one woman standing stationary on a public highway stop anyone from exercising their rights?

I already referred to that:

Incidentally, I am unclear about the details of why she had to be removed by the police - as others said, could not the marchers simply pass her by? But if for some reason the fact that she was standing there physically impeded the ability of the marchers to continue with their legal march, then there is nothing really one should commend her for.

What media (including those who actually support and commend her) are reporting is that she stopped the neonazi marchers from continuing until after the police arrived and removed her. So for some reason she did impede them. Of course if she was just standing there whilst she was passed by and it was more of a symbolic gesture, then obviously she did not stop anyone from exercising their rights (still not a hero, though).

[crazy canuck]

AFAIK the demonstration had a permit to use that stretch of road at that time.

Sure, but that does not mean that people should not protest something that has been approved by the state.  In fact, that is often the very purpose of protest.

[Martinus]

AFAIK the demonstration had a permit to use that stretch of road at that time.

Sure, but that does not mean that people should not protest something that has been approved by the state.  In fact, that is often the very purpose of protest.

The key question is whether her protest effectively prevented those other people from exercising their right or not.

[frunk]

The key question is whether her protest effectively prevented those other people from exercising their right or not.

I think it enhanced it.  Would you even know about it if she wasn't there?

[crazy canuck]

AFAIK the demonstration had a permit to use that stretch of road at that time.

Sure, but that does not mean that people should not protest something that has been approved by the state.  In fact, that is often the very purpose of protest.

The key question is whether her protest effectively prevented those other people from exercising their right or not.

Why is that key?

Protest isnt wrong because it is effective 

You are descending into the kind of relativist nonsense you seem to reject in the other thread.   I suppose whoever you are following these days hasn't really thought that through.