A Scottish YouTube comedian, Mark Meechan, was found guilty of a hate crime on Tuesday for posting a video of himself training his girlfriend’s pug, Buddha, to mimic a Nazi and respond to commands the court ruled anti-Semitic.
In the video from April 2016, Buddha is shown watching Adolph Hitler speaking at a rally at the 1936 Olympic Games in Berlin, raising its paw at the command of “Sieg Heil,” and becoming alert every time Meechan says “gas the Jews”—a trick Meechan demonstrates a dozen times.
Meechan, whose YouTube account name is Count Dankula, praises Buddha in the video by saying, “Who’s a good wee Nazi!”
At the end of the video—which is still up on YouTube in restricted mode and has been viewed more than 3 million times—Meechan says he’s not a racist, he just wanted to piss off his girlfriend.
Video in question:
Video is pretty tame. You could even argue it's anti-nazi since the uploader was making this girlfriend's cute dog into the furthers thing from cute he could think of: A Nazi.
You can tell it's pretty innocuous. This is kind of crazy. Glad I live in the U.S where similar things like this have been deemed unconstitutional. Still though, freedom of speech getting shitted on like this bugs me even if it's across the pond.
Yeah ***** hilarious to teach a dog to salute hitler, so funny! I love free speech...it allows me to tell this idiot and those that agree with him they're douche bags.
(04-03-2018, 02:36 AM)RICHMONDBENGAL_07 Wrote: Yeah ***** hilarious to teach a dog to salute hitler, so funny! I love free speech...it allows me to tell this idiot and those that agree with him they're douche bags.
I don't agree with laws that prevent people from discussing things like Nazism. Nothing about this is "hate speech". Fortunately for the US, this video would be constitutional. Not that I agree with this idiot or his attempt at humor, but we have the right to say whatever stupid thing we want short of threatening people.
A Scottish YouTube comedian, Mark Meechan, was found guilty of a hate crime on Tuesday for posting a video of himself training his girlfriend’s pug, Buddha, to mimic a Nazi and respond to commands the court ruled anti-Semitic.
In the video from April 2016, Buddha is shown watching Adolph Hitler speaking at a rally at the 1936 Olympic Games in Berlin, raising its paw at the command of “Sieg Heil,” and becoming alert every time Meechan says “gas the Jews”—a trick Meechan demonstrates a dozen times.
Meechan, whose YouTube account name is Count Dankula, praises Buddha in the video by saying, “Who’s a good wee Nazi!”
At the end of the video—which is still up on YouTube in restricted mode and has been viewed more than 3 million times—Meechan says he’s not a racist, he just wanted to piss off his girlfriend.
Video in question:
Video is pretty tame. You could even argue it's anti-nazi since the uploader was making this girlfriend's cute dog into the furthers thing from cute he could think of: A Nazi.
You can tell it's pretty innocuous. This is kind of crazy. Glad I live in the U.S where similar things like this have been deemed unconstitutional. Still though, freedom of speech getting shitted on like this bugs me even if it's across the pond.
Free speech has its limit here in Europe ( I suppose it's the same in Scotland ). You can't do racist things or nazi things.
That's it. That's our rules.
And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.
(04-03-2018, 09:40 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I don't agree with laws that prevent people from discussing things like Nazism. Nothing about this is "hate speech". Fortunately for the US, this video would be constitutional. Not that I agree with this idiot or his attempt at humor, but we have the right to say whatever stupid thing we want short of threatening people.
That sums it up for me. I have a "I don't agree with what you say but i'll defend to the death your right to say it" kind of thing. Not that there's much to agree with here. It was just a shitty joke.
I boo or show signs of disapproval or throw tomatoes at bad jokes. I don't get the person convicted and thrown in jail.
(04-03-2018, 09:52 AM)Arturo Bandini Wrote: Free speech has its limit here in Europe ( I suppose it's the same in Scotland ). You can't do racist things or nazi things.
That's it. That's our rules.
Yeah, i've noticed that European people are perfectly okay with their governments being authortarian shitheads.
But I guess after centuries of being shitted on by kings, religious institutions, and foreign invaders, this is just par the course for Europe. Shame really.
(04-03-2018, 10:07 AM)THE Bigzoman Wrote: Yeah, i've noticed that European people are perfectly okay with their governments being authortarian shitheads.
But I guess after centuries of being shitted on by kings, religious institutions, and foreign invaders, this is just par the course for Europe. Shame really.
That's it and we don't have guns too, we just don't need them.
Everyone has his way.
And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.
(04-03-2018, 10:07 AM)THE Bigzoman Wrote: Yeah, i've noticed that European people are perfectly okay with their governments being authortarian shitheads.
But I guess after centuries of being shitted on by kings, religious institutions, and foreign invaders, this is just par the course for Europe. Shame really.
Really?
I mean... I can understand the objections on the subject at hand. I'm not perfectly happy with that either.
But a country that just went for Donald Trump can't really point at other democracies and call their leaders authoritarian shitheads. That just looks a bit ridiculous.
(04-03-2018, 10:28 AM)Arturo Bandini Wrote: That's it and we don't have guns too, we just don't need them.
Everyone has his way.
Absolutely true. However, to a US citizen the idea of facing a fine, much less a custodial sentence, for making a joke or expressing an opinion is both baffling and shocking. I suppose it's the same way you feel about firearms ownership.
(04-03-2018, 10:48 AM)hollodero Wrote: Really?
I mean... I can understand the objections on the subject at hand. I'm not perfectly happy with that either.
But a country that just went for Donald Trump can't really point at other democracies and call their leaders authoritarian shitheads. That just looks a bit ridiculous.
Eh, historically the US has a pretty good track record in this regards as opposed to Europe. I say that knowing full well that Europe is not a homogenous monoculture. Also, the Trump as an authoritarian trope is not exactly backed up by facts or actions. I agree he'd certainly like to run things in that fashion, but he hasn't been able to actually do so. You recently had Schumer bragging about the Dems being able to accomplish more as the minority party.
What I find disturbing is how these hate speech laws are used to threaten or silence people with legitimate complaints about how their government is handling things such as the migrant crisis.
(04-03-2018, 11:10 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Eh, historically the US has a pretty good track record in this regards as opposed to Europe.
I agree without hesitation of course. (Although Arturo does have a point when mentioning the "anti-communist" era in US politics)
Otherwise, recent US developments wouldn't be so stunnning.
(04-03-2018, 11:10 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Also, the Trump as an authoritarian trope is not exactly backed up by facts or actions. I agree he'd certainly like to run things in that fashion, but he hasn't been able to actually do so.
Well, "not backed up" is a matter of perspective. Overall, yeah I too think Trump would very much like to run things in that fashion, as you said, I forgo examples.
Europe's certainly not perfect and critique is always fine, but I still feel like doubling down on the point that in these times it's a bit out of place for the US to call European leaders authoritarian shitheads and European voters prone to said figures. As of now, it's the US prone to that Trump guy.
(04-03-2018, 11:10 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: You recently had Schumer bragging about the Dems being able to accomplish more as the minority party.
Yeah well, that doesn't speak to Trump's intentions though.
(04-03-2018, 11:10 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: What I find disturbing is how these hate speech laws are used to threaten or silence people with legitimate complaints about how their government is handling things such as the migrant crisis.
OK, that's just not true, not if you put it this way. I have complaints about how we handle the crisis and sure can say so. Other people, politicians even, have complaints and some solutions I'd consider very grim, quite hateful and such, and they can talk about that everywhere in length, they get votes, they don't get trouble with the law. Same goes for the supporters, they are free to state their point of view and do so quite visibly. People that get threatened by the law actually have to call migrants subhuman scum or suggest mass killings or gas chambers or something of that sort. Beyond that, there's nothing happening regarding the law.
Again, disclaimer, I'm not 100% fine with the law as it is and also think it's ridiculous to fine the guy in the OP.
(04-03-2018, 11:28 AM)Arturo Bandini Wrote: Wasn't it forbidden to be a communist in the USA at one time ?
Legally speaking, no. For that four year period of McCarthyism is certainly got people blackballed and cost them employment. It would also be absolutely true that being a known communist during that period of time would make you a social pariah.
(04-03-2018, 11:31 AM)hollodero Wrote: I agree without hesitation of course. (Although Arturo does have a point when mentioning the "anti-communist" era in US politics)
Otherwise, recent US developments wouldn't be so stunnning.
The McCarthy era was a micro-blip, but point taken. Even during that period the penalties were social, not criminal. This made them no less devastating to those affected, I am aware.
Quote:Well, "not backed up" is a matter of perspective. Overall, yeah I too think Trump would very much like to run things in that fashion, as you said, I forgo examples.
Europe's certainly not perfect and critique is always fine, but I still feel like doubling down on the point that in these times it's a bit out of place for the US to call European leaders authoritarian shitheads and European voters prone to said figures. As of now, it's the US prone to that Trump guy.
Authoritarian, not at all. I can't think of a European example outside of the former Warsaw Pact states, which we really aren't discussing.
Quote:Yeah well, that doesn't speak to Trump's intentions though.
True, motivation is certainly important. I think it once again shows what an excellent job the Framers did setting up a system that still functions largely as intended almost 250 years later.
Quote:OK, that's just not true, not if you put it this way. I have complaints about how we handle the crisis and sure can say so. Other people, politicians even, have complaints and some solutions I'd consider very grim, quite hateful and such, and they can talk about that everywhere in length, they get votes, they don't get trouble with the law. Same goes for the supporters, they are free to state their point of view and do so quite visibly. People that get threatened by the law actually have to call migrants subhuman scum or suggest mass killings or gas chambers or something of that sort. Beyond that, there's nothing happening regarding the law.
On this I cannot agree with you. It is certainly not the case in Austria, but you can absolutely make a case for the law being used in this manner in Sweden.
Quote:Again, disclaimer, I'm not 100% fine with the law as it is and also think it's ridiculous to fine the guy in the OP.
I think the thing that Americans find so off putting is that it criminalizes offending someone. When you make someone's feelings a basis for criminal censure I think you've crossed a very dangerous line. What is offensive is such a nebulous and personal construct, I just don't see how a country with such a rich legal history can codify it.
(04-03-2018, 11:55 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: The McCarthy era was a micro-blip, but point taken. Even during that period the penalties were social, not criminal. This made them no less devastating to those affected, I am aware.
Bert Brecht distinctly was to appear in front of an US tribunal, and I'm sure there were others that had to deal with criminal charges for "un-american activities". There was a committee as far as I know. Although of course not my strong foot.
Also, japanese internment camps. There were some micro-blips. But I wouldn't want to bring that up in lenght because I agree with your overall point there.
(04-03-2018, 11:55 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Authoritarian, not at all. I can't think of a European example outside of the former Warsaw Pact states, which we really aren't discussing.
I wanted to add "western" European, thanks for getting by without it. Also, I'm perfectly fine with calling our leaders shitheads... just without the "authoritarian".
(04-03-2018, 11:55 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: True, motivation is certainly important. I think it once again shows what an excellent job the Framers did setting up a system that still functions largely as intended almost 250 years later.
There's some truth to that... some. Jury's still out for me if it keeps functioning or not. I don't want to make a habit out of staining the framers, but there was a civil war their framework did not prevent.
(04-03-2018, 11:55 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: On this I cannot agree with you. It is certainly not the case in Austria, but you can absolutely make a case for the law being used in this manner in Sweden.
Maybe... for some reason Americans seem to know way more about Sweden than I do. If you please - what would said case look like?
(04-03-2018, 11:55 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I think the thing that Americans find so off putting is that it criminalizes offending someone. When you make someone's feelings a basis for criminal censure I think you've crossed a very dangerous line. What is offensive is such a nebulous and personal construct, I just don't see how a country with such a rich legal history can codify it.
I don't necessarily think the line we crossed was a dangerous one. This guy just did something harmless (albeit a bit untasteful) and got caught up in an unfortunate extreme regarding the current law. I'm not defending the court's decision, but I think it's also not a symptom of more dangerous things to come. But I can't really argue that one comprehensively, it's just that it didn't really play out as you fear as of now.
I guess I just feel that you overemphazise on the "someone's feelings"-part. When it comes to hate speech or NS re-engagement, the scope is pretty narrow, it's not like just anyone can show up with anything, claim he's offended and the court will automatically decide in his favour.
(04-03-2018, 11:31 AM)hollodero Wrote: I agree without hesitation of course. (Although Arturo does have a point when mentioning the "anti-communist" era in US politics)
Otherwise, recent US developments wouldn't be so stunnning.
Well, "not backed up" is a matter of perspective. Overall, yeah I too think Trump would very much like to run things in that fashion, as you said, I forgo examples.
Europe's certainly not perfect and critique is always fine, but I still feel like doubling down on the point that in these times it's a bit out of place for the US to call European leaders authoritarian shitheads and European voters prone to said figures. As of now, it's the US prone to that Trump guy.
Yeah well, that doesn't speak to Trump's intentions though.
OK, that's just not true, not if you put it this way. I have complaints about how we handle the crisis and sure can say so. Other people, politicians even, have complaints and some solutions I'd consider very grim, quite hateful and such, and they can talk about that everywhere in length, they get votes, they don't get trouble with the law. Same goes for the supporters, they are free to state their point of view and do so quite visibly. People that get threatened by the law actually have to call migrants subhuman scum or suggest mass killings or gas chambers or something of that sort. Beyond that, there's nothing happening regarding the law.
Again, disclaimer, I'm not 100% fine with the law as it is and also think it's ridiculous to fine the guy in the OP.
Trump is really aside the point.
Europe has a history with this crap. It's way more extensive and numerous than in the US. Soit's not a stretch to say that they're more apt to tolerate it. It's the equlivant of a kid saying "it's okay, I'm used to it" when someone tells him he shouldn't let that big kid bully him all the time.
(04-03-2018, 05:00 PM)THE Bigzoman Wrote: Trump is really aside the point.
Oh he very much is not. This is your president. And in times where Trump is president, Americans don't get to lecture western Europe about freedom of speech. We can clearly see the Trump version of that concept, the one your electorate went to. It's having a state propaganda channel to flatter the leadership, and threaten unwilling media to sue them, to open up the libel laws for being able to. Not for obvious lies - for being "dishonest". Trump calls the uncooperating media the enemy of the people. So these are things going on in US leadership these times. It just looks funny when you point to some other democracies and their "authoritarian shitheads" with that huge elephant in your own yard.
(04-03-2018, 05:00 PM)THE Bigzoman Wrote: Europe has a history with this crap. It's way more extensive and numerous than in the US. Soit's not a stretch to say that they're more apt to tolerate it. It's the equlivant of a kid saying "it's okay, I'm used to it" when someone tells him he shouldn't let that big kid bully him all the time.
Don't call us stupid kids. Please. We don't get bullied all the time. It's also quite easily avoidable, don't train your dog Sieg Heil poses and share it on youtube. And I agree, people should feel free to be such douchebags, probably, there's a point that can be made about this. But don't exaggerate this example to a large freedom of speech crisis in Europe.
![[Image: ulVdgX6.jpg]](http://i.imgur.com/ulVdgX6.jpg)
![[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]](https://i.imgur.com/4CV0TeR.png)
![[Image: giphy.gif]](https://media0.giphy.com/media/1kwsTjL8BNqlszNtnCE/giphy.gif)
![[Image: 416686247_404249095282684_84217049823664...e=659A7198]](https://scontent.fphx1-2.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/416686247_404249095282684_8421704982366424390_n.jpg?_nc_cat=102&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=3635dc&_nc_ohc=p8hMrwwk1IoAX8mnFLJ&_nc_ht=scontent.fphx1-2.fna&oh=00_AfBXs4gKHr4knFejO874dfV3zzLd_bq4GiUqHxGWFlwbug&oe=659A7198)
