13. Freedom of speech, political correctness, racism.
Historically, Irish and Italians were discriminated against in the United States of America and the United Kingdom, but no one has a problem with talking about the Irish mafia or the Italian mafia or accuse you of being a conspiracy theorist for talking about the Irish mafia or Italian mafia (besides, it is a small minority of Irish and Italians who are involved in any type of crime).
The suicide rate for young men is high in the United States of America, but no one has a problem with mentioning the fact that young men commit the most crimes (again, it is a small minority of men who commit serious crimes on the level of rape or murder).
Active duty military combat personnel and combat veterans have rates of suicide and mental disorders, but that does not mean that we can not acknowledge the wrongdoing done by the governments that they work for or question rather or not some military actions are justified.
Why is it any different when it comes to ethnic or religious minorities?
Owen B. Ry Dawson Collaboration
"Let me teach you how the left enables the migrant crisis and basically give carte blanche for minorities to do whatever they want to anyone else, because when you criticize what they're doing, you will be accused of intolerance, racism, sexism, et cetera.
In the left circle, I have "Muslims", within it, "Wahhabi". In the right circle, I have "Jews", and within it, "Zionist Jews".
Now when someone criticizes Wahhabi fanatics that are incompatible with west society, forcing women to dress like beekepers, and tend to be prone to crime and low education, the left will run to their defense and say that you're not criticizing Wahhabi, you're Islamophobic and criticizing Muslims in general. That shuts a lot of people who don't want to be accused to being Islamophobic down. But people who really do hate Muslims come and don't just crises Wahhabi, but hate on all Muslims in general, and they do not care about being called "Islamophobic" because they really do hate Muslims. This alienates people who hates Wahhabism, but not all Muslims.
Same thing with Jews. When someone criticizes the ideology or actions of the State of Israel, the Israeli lobby or pro-Israeli media, someone else will call them anti-Semitic and say that whoever is criticizing Zionist Jews hate all Jews in general. Then someone will come along and hate on all Jews in general instead of just the extremists, and get mad at people who just say "Zionist" or "Wahhabi", alienating people who talk criticize Wahhabi Islam or the policies of the Israeli government.
We can make another bubble of migrants in general, and within it, refugees. In this case, the actual refugees are the minority. There are a lot more people coming as economic migrants, and there are a lot of Wahabis or otherwise backwards people among the economic migrants. What the left will do when someone criticizes economic migrants is accuse the individual criticizing economic migrants of not caring for refugees, and the best friend of the aforementioned faction of leftists are actual xenophobic bigots who really do hate foreigners, then the Zionists come in, take advantage of a migrant crisis, and spin it into causing resentment and hatred towards Muslims in general, which generates sympathy for Israel, Israel's apartheid state, bombing Palestine killing Palestinians, and waging war on Israel's neighbors.
On one side, there are right-wing assholes who are the only people criticizing excessive immigration and general political correctness, and on the other side, are spineless, wimpy leftist cucks who are scared to death of being called "racist" or other names, and are no better than the people they criticize. But where is everyone else? Surely, you can criticize illegal immigration and excessive immigration without being a racist, xenophobic asshole. Surely, you can have a nuanced position and criticize Islam, Judaism, or other ideologies without hating all Muslims or all Jews are individual people.
The Zionists and Wahabis have an alliance. The governments of Israel and Saudi Arabia are united in their imperialistic desires, and have common enemies which block their expansion, such as Iran and Syria. The biggest victim group of the Wahabi Muslims are normal Muslims in Syria, Iraq, and other parts of the world, who are victims Wahabi terrorists.
Now its really hard. Basic bitches always chose A or B. They do not understand nuance. With the widespread use of heroin and alcoholism in the United Kingdom, there is a large portion of males walking about with some degree of brain damage. Britain does not have thinkers anymore, and instead, has hooligans who get drunk and argue about football. That is why we need to make little pictures and graphs to explain to them how they're being manipulated and what to change about government policy."
Freedom of Speech: Is Offensive Speech Good For Society? - Learn Liberty
"Freedom of expression matters precisely because it allows us to voice and hear unpopular and controversial views. You don't have to live offensive speech. In fact, you should feel free to vigorously denounce and criticize speech that you see as wrong. But when people resort to force to prevent or restrict expressions that they disagree with, they undermine the very principles of freedom and tolerance that they claim to defend.
When he allow the open expression of hateful opinions, we create opportunities to publicly refute them. When the U.S. Supreme court has upheld the right of Neo-Nazis to march through Jewish neighborhoods, expressing acutely offensive and distressing views. But, when such ugly demonstrations have taken place, much larger counter-demonstrations have arisen in opposition. The result, the greater awareness taking a stand against hate.
Allowing offensive speech also matters because it promotes the progress of human understanding. Some expressions, once widely denounced as offensive or even dangerous, have won vindication and become received truth, rather it was scientists such as Galileo challenging religious dogma about astronomy, abolitionists calling for the end of slavery, civil rights leaders demanding an end to Jim Crow laws, or gay magazine publishers, whose work was labelled 'obscenity'.
Speech that authorities once tried to censor has instead contributed immeasurably to our culture. When authorities seize the power to silence offensive views, they also have necessity seize the power of dissenting and minority views. In effect, censors peruse a policy of ignorance by design. That's why smart societies respect freedom of expression, even when, especially when, it causes discomfort and offense."
Some more recommended listening: