Inspired by the topic in the GOP Credibility Watch thread...

At what point does advocating the overthrow of the government become a crime? Does the first amendment trump all, or is there a tipping point with the rhetoric?

Given the increased prevalence we're seeing with wingnuts these days, this seems to take on increased significance. I, for one, worry a lot about what would happen if there were any public assassination attempts these days.

11/22/2009 10:44:10 AM

it seems to me that someone who is serious about overthrowing the government would not care too much about the criminality of their actions. They've already determined that the laws of the current government are not legitimate.

that's why we have criminal courts and military courts. there is a fundamental difference between acts of war and acts of crime.

11/22/2009 10:50:19 AM

Overthrowing a body of law is by definition criminal. That does not make it immoral. That is pretty much all I'm going to say on that subject.

It isn't going to happen anyway. The socialist left (loosely defined as those on the left comfortable with the use of state power to achieve their goals) is not interested in working with either "small l" libertarians, the fascist right, or the theologically driven right. The theologically driven right and the fascist right may have a lot in common, but the fascist right has an interest in controlling the state apparatus, not overthrowing it and the theocratic right simply doesn't have the numbers or, quite frankly, the will to do it. The libertarians are the only ones who would seriously like to see the state radically shrunk or overthrown. By their very nature, they're not prone to the kind of organization which would be required in an overthrow.

No, I think the greatest threat to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness is the pursuit of privilege and gain through legislation. That one is pretty entrenched so the most likely overthrow of the principles of US government will come from within.

Quote :

"I, for one, worry a lot about what would happen if there were any public assassination attempts these days."

The overwhelming majority of assassinations of heads of state in the 20th century were conducted by leftists, not right-wingers.

11/22/2009 10:50:22 AM

^ Just to be clear, I wasn't asking it as a partisan issue. I'm asking because there's an awful lot of this rhetoric being exposed to the public right now. Innernets, on TV, lots of rallies, etc.

11/22/2009 10:52:45 AM

Quote :

"Given the increased prevalence we're seeing with wingnuts these days, this seems to take on increased significance."

if by "we're" you mean you yourself... there's no increased prevalence in wingnuts - you can just see them easier now because they aren't of the same political persuasion as yourself.

11/22/2009 10:52:49 AM

^ you can see them now because it's easier for them to spread their messages nowadays. that has nothing to do with my, or your, or their ideology.

11/22/2009 10:57:31 AM

srsly? its easier for them to spread their message today than it was 2 yrs ago? lol... methinks u overestimate the usage of twitter.

11/22/2009 10:59:44 AM

o rly? then why are people like Newt and Michelle Bachmann using it to call for rallies on the grounds of the Capitol building?

11/22/2009 11:03:17 AM

oh i see it does have something to do with the wingnuts ideology.

you never seemed to post complaints about code-pink or dailykos wingnuts while bush was in office.

11/22/2009 11:04:35 AM

Quote :

"I'm asking because there's an awful lot of this rhetoric being exposed to the public right now. Innernets, on TV, lots of rallies, etc."

I think you're slightly off on your analysis / understanding the driving factor of this movement, such that it is one. I think a lot of these people feel like their voice in congress has already been overthrown. There has been a rather lengthy stream of bipartisan legislation which has passed through the House and Senate which was actively opposed by a substantial minority, if not outright majority of voters. The fact that as an American citizen, or even a substantial group of American citizens, your voice is being dismissed out of hand is a bit disconcerting.

I do think the movement gained momentum with Barack Obama's election. A portion of American, wrongly, felt that GWB was their guy and thus not a threat to their personal freedom. But that isn't anything new. The yowls from the late civil liberty activists from the left have largely fell silent despite the fact that President Obama has made no substantial changes to the security apparatus put in place by the last administration.


I would expect violence from the state long before I expected any sort of real revolt.

11/22/2009 11:05:17 AM

Quote :

"At what point does advocating the overthrow of the government become a crime? Does the first amendment trump all, or is there a tipping point with the rhetoric?"

"The Constitution is not a suicide pact," as the saying goes.

Historically, it doesn't take much of a threat to provoke a response from the government (the Alien and Sedition Acts under Adams, Habeas Corpus under Lincoln, the Sedition and Espionage Acts under Wilson).

I doubt this will result in any legislation, though. It should be handled on a case by case basis, and when rhetoric begins to pose a clear and present danger to society, then it will be a crime.

Quote :

"I, for one, worry a lot about what would happen if there were any public assassination attempts these days."

As in the government response to the assassination of a liberal politician? I can't really see it going overboard.

[Edited on November 22, 2009 at 11:06 AM. Reason : ]

11/22/2009 11:05:53 AM

^^^ i wasn't paying attention to TSB back then. i've only been really interested in posting here in the last month or two.

back on topic, tho. where's the line between protected speech and criminal behavior?

Quote :

"As in the government response to the assassination of a liberal politician? I can't really see it going overboard."

i was more thinking about the reaction in the populace, not from the government.

[Edited on November 22, 2009 at 11:09 AM. Reason : .]

11/22/2009 11:07:30 AM

there would be some riots in the big cities... no different than in the late 80s, early 90s.

big deal.

11/22/2009 11:10:27 AM

If Obama was assassinated you'd see massive race riots. If that sounds simplistic I apologize but the emotions it would raise wouldn't exactly be nuanced. There are those in the "black community" (not specifically limited to skin color itself but to those who embrace their skin color as an essential part of their identity) who would see it as an attack on them personally.

11/22/2009 11:12:09 AM

yea i'm not saying it wouldn't be a big deal in and of itself, i'm just saying that it wouldn't lead anywhere close to a revolution and overthrow of the government.

things would be dicey for probably a few years and then get back to normal, just like has always happened throughout our history.

11/22/2009 11:16:11 AM

If the local government representatives like you as a person, it is protected speech. If they do not, then it was a crime.

Some people get arrested for breaking into their own house, while others get a free pass for murder (their word against a corpse).

11/22/2009 11:17:21 AM

Quote :

"where's the line between protected speech and criminal behavior?"

The latest standard is if the speech will lead to "imminent lawless action."

Brandenburg v. Ohio

11/22/2009 11:19:46 AM

Quote :

"i'm just saying that it wouldn't lead anywhere close to a revolution and overthrow of the government."

Overthrow of the Government? Probably not. It would cause significant social repercussions and I don't think everything would return to "normal" on the back-side.

11/22/2009 11:22:59 AM

Quote :

"I'm asking because there's an awful lot of this rhetoric being exposed to the public right now. Innernets, on TV, lots of rallies, etc."

I think you’re overestimating the support these sentiments have, because of over-reporting by Fox News and the side effects this had on outer media outlets.

FAR more people showed up in Washington in support of gay rights than did the tea baggers, but you didn’t hear nearly as much about it, because a major news networks wasn’t pushing that rally.

I think you’re hearing a lot of this rhetoric, but I don’t think it’s sticking as much as they’d like us to think.

11/22/2009 11:25:34 AM

Quote :

"I think you’re overestimating the support these sentiments have, because of over-reporting by Fox News and the side effects this had on outer media outlets. FAR more people showed up in Washington in support of gay rights than did the tea baggers, but you didn’t hear nearly as much about it, because a major news networks wasn’t pushing that rally."

But that's part of the point. Some of this rhetoric is being pushed far moreso than other parts. It's disproportionately visible to people. More airtime means that their agenda is being presented to a wider audience.

11/22/2009 11:28:31 AM

FEAR UNCERTAINTY AND DOUBT!!

11/22/2009 11:33:51 AM

Glenn Beck's motto! Oh, wait.

11/22/2009 11:35:09 AM

srsly... you guys get all hot and bothered by some random crank that has a show on at 5pm.

insecurity complex?

11/22/2009 11:38:41 AM

^ yeah, popular media is so harmless

Quote :

" Public Policy Polling released this shocking nugget on its blog: "a 52% majority of GOP voters nationally think that ACORN stole the Presidential election for Barack Obama last year, with only 27% granting that he won it legitimately.""

11/22/2009 11:46:28 AM

And from your own graph, apparently a 51% majority of democrats think that 9/11 was an orchestrated conspiracy. What's your point? That your crazies are better than their crazies?

I've touched on this in other threads, but I think if you're seeing an increase in rhetoric and punditry it has a lot to do with the fact that in the last year and half to two years, the government has really shown its true stripes and hammered through ill advised and unpopular legislation. This on top of nearly 8 years of the political left being more or less ignored by the white house, and the libertarian leaning being disillusioned with the conduct of the political right during those same 8 years. Add to this now an angry political right from a (richly deserved) trouncing in the 2008 elections and you have a lot of anger and frustration at the government, all being brought to a boil in the last 2 years.

And it doesn't help that the messages coming from the white house are inconsistent at best, and politically expedient lies at worst, meaning that there is no real message or direction from the executive branch. A completely dysfunctional congress with the republicans acting like 2 year olds and the democrats letting themselves be lead around by harpies and doomsayers means that there's no clear direction from the legislative branch.

Finally on top of all of this, the last 2 years have shown that the government in general, no matter its promises or statements to the contrary are not looking out for the interests of the people, they're looking out for the interests of their lobbyists, and the medical reform debate has done nothing to change that image.

Is it any wonder that rhetoric and punditry is at a high? No one is speaking for the people, so the people are speaking for themselves.

11/22/2009 12:23:49 PM

^ winner

11/22/2009 12:46:26 PM

rhetoric and punditry are at a high because the majority of americans are ignorant as hell and love to have their preconceived notions affirmed for them by the men in the motion picture box. and those men are happy to provide it, no matter how illogical, crazy, or flat out wrong it is, because, well, that shit pays quite well.

11/22/2009 1:11:02 PM

you people... we had CIVIL WAR for christ's sake and you're saying that rhetoric and punditry are at a high.

No sense of perspective here...

11/22/2009 1:37:09 PM

^^ Somehow I get the impression you don't count yourself as part of the majority.

If the people are ignorant about the government, the politicians have no one to blame but themselves. They try to obfuscate even the simplest of procedures and even they don't read or understand the laws they pass. If the politicians, who are paid to not be ignorant about the government, are ignorant, what hope do the people have?

^ Rhetoric and punditry != violence and revolt

Of the 4 boxes, rhetoric and punditry only account for at most the first two. So it is possible for rhetoric and punditry to be high and us to be no where near a civil war. In fact, arguably the threshold to war is much higher now than it was back then due to a number of technological and social factors.

[Edited on November 22, 2009 at 1:43 PM. Reason : asdf]

11/22/2009 1:38:01 PM

I'm just saying that discourse has been in worse shape at times throughout our history than it is now

11/22/2009 2:02:47 PM

Every time I think our nation's rhetoric has gone too far, I think back just to the Johnson administration where quite literally, the sitting president ran an ad saying that Barry Goldwater would literally destroy civilization with nuclear weapons. Speaking of the 1960s, even in the heyday of the anti-government, anti-Bush rhetoric of this decade, we have in my opinion no where near reached the vitriol of the 1960s with violence at political conventions and soldiers shooting students.

So until we can at least recreate the political chaos of the 1960s with its extreme violence, aggressive political activism, and assassinations of key national figures, I'm not particularly worried about any sort of government overthrow.

11/22/2009 3:37:13 PM

Remember, remember the fifth of November.
Gunpowder, Treason and Plot.
I see no reason why Gunpowder Treason
Should ever be forgot

11/22/2009 3:39:51 PM

as someone who is going to receive a security clearance soon, I am NOT posting in this thread

...

11/22/2009 4:00:02 PM

I could see a revolt against financial institutions before the actual government. And I don't know about full-scale revolt, but something, a few disgruntled guys getting their bomb on.

11/22/2009 4:05:58 PM

Conservatives, by definition, prefer the status quo. Revolution does not come naturally to them. So yes, I could see some anti-capitalist leftists detonating a bomb outside of the Goldman Sachs office before I see a right-wing takeover of the US Government.

11/22/2009 6:15:50 PM

^ So the folks with the KILL OBAMA signs at the tea party rallies are lefties?

11/22/2009 6:27:36 PM

^^ so.... since the status quo is now "democrats and Obama are in power", true conservatives are cool with that?

that's a pretty fucking naive and flimsy view of Conservatism.

11/22/2009 6:45:38 PM

Overthrowing the government will accomplish absolutely nothing. All you will accomplish is bringing in a new boss, same as the old.

11/22/2009 6:51:17 PM

Quote :

"Given the increased prevalence we're seeing with wingnuts these days, this seems to take on increased significance. I, for one, worry a lot about what would happen if there were any public assassination attempts these days."

What?

Do you even have the slightest clue about what happened during the 60's and early 70's? Do you think that because BoBob doesn't want the gubments touching his Medicare, that the US government is in danger of being toppled? Hint: Just because the internet and 24/7 news focuses solely on adults who love to throw temper tantrums with a 6th grade reasoning does not mean the republic is in danger of overthrow.

11/22/2009 6:52:30 PM

^ actually i hadn't thought about that grandma that yelled "keep your hands off my medicare!" during those august town halls. but there are plenty of other examples that should concern any interested citizen, so let's not confuse the methods being used today with what's being said.

and more to the point, those people with the so-called sixth grade point of view are the ones wielding the pitchforks, guns, signs, what have you.

[Edited on November 22, 2009 at 7:14 PM. Reason : .]

11/22/2009 7:13:26 PM

Quote :

" as someone who is going to receive a security clearance soon, I am NOT posting in this thread"

Security screenings for a secret clearance consist of people going around interviewing people who know you asking if you're a terrorist, and checking your criminal record. It's not like they're rifling through your garbage bin and your e-mail. [/derail]

11/22/2009 8:41:01 PM

^ If he was that concerned about his clearance he wouldn't have mentioned it in TSB.

Quote :

"a new boss, same as the old."

inspired by the Who?

Quote :

"So the folks with the KILL OBAMA signs at the tea party rallies are lefties?"

No, but talk is a long way from action, and that is the point. The rallies were a chance for the disaffected to make their voices heard. They did. They're going home now to return to their day-to-day lives. They lack the revolutionary passion of a young leftist whose world-view obliges himself to see revolution everywhere. Again, for all the bluster of right-wing organizations, none of them has actually accomplished anything of import. Every major bottom up revolution in the last 60 years has come from communists. (With the possible exception of Iran which was a combination of quasi-socialist ideology and theocracy.)

Quote :

"since the status quo is now "democrats and Obama are in power", true conservatives are cool with that?"

No, but they're not upset enough to revolt. They don't want to make a new world, they want to keep what they (think) they had. They don't have the passion and vision for a concerted revolution.

11/22/2009 10:26:24 PM

Quote :

"No, but they're not upset enough to revolt. They don't want to make a new world, they want to keep what they (think) they had. They don't have the passion and vision for a concerted revolution."

while I agree that Conservatives aren't "upset enough to [truly] revolt", it doesn't have anything to do with their Conservative ideology. Just like Liberals weren't upset enough to revolt during the previous administration, it has more to do with the current state and place of our American society than any particular person's or group's political leanings.

That is, we, as Americans, have generally just become fat-and-happy, and the vast majority of us, liberal or conservative, simply don't have the ambition or fortitude to stage any real revolution or revolt. This is mostly new to our generation, or within the last 40-50 years. During the Depression and WWII, and before, individual Americans were willing to stand up and fight/die for their country in large numbers. Now, we're lucky to get people to get out from behind their computers, or maybe attend a local protest, and at most go to a national protest on occasion, and most that do are just fueled my misleading media talking heads and are without any real facts or convictions themselves.

Has nothing to do with if a person considers themselves Liberal or Conservative. Has everything to do with the fact that we're all just fucking lazy.

11/22/2009 11:22:43 PM

^ I disagree. Americans have always been fat and happy. As Werner Sombart famously put it, the ship of American socialism ran aground on "shoals of roast beef and apple pie."

We have only ever become violent when faced with an asserted effort to threaten our state of fat+happy. The British were perceived to by trying to turn America into another India under the thumb of the East India Company, and the North did that to the South before the civil war, using trade policy to impoverish the South.

[Edited on November 23, 2009 at 12:24 AM. Reason : .,.]

11/23/2009 12:21:04 AM

that's fucking absurd to claim that colonists, Victorian era Americans, or even early 20th century Americans were anywhere near the levels of fat/happy or laziness that we've become in the last 50 years.

absolutely absurd.
that is all.

11/23/2009 1:10:52 AM

Well yes, but his point is that we wouldn't have gone through the trouble of going to war with our mother country if the King didn't do everything in his power to absolutely inconvenience, at best, the colonials.

Anyway, this thread entire thread is absurd because there's nothing happening in the country right now that would make any logical individual think revolution is remotely plausible. Its as if Vietnam protests, the Civil Rights movement, or the economic realignment of the late 70's never happened. If anything, the fact that most of you are going to come to this board to let off steam instead of organizing any type of public gathering when some bit of legislation you don't approve of passes lends even more credence to the idea of passive America.

I also want to point out that poor, impoverished people that have intense pent up frustration are the ones that tend to revolt. Unfortunately for conservative red blood America, that group is going to be predominantly latino and the next couple of decades. Bonus homework assignment: Find out which side, left or right, their revolutions tend to go.

11/23/2009 4:10:16 AM

gee, I wonder

11/23/2009 8:10:43 AM

Quote :

"absolutely absurd. that is all."

not really. Relative to the lot of your average commoner in England in the same time period, we were pretty well off. Since our inception we've been at or near the leading edge of the comfort curve. The American dream is the freedom to pursue personal profit so long as it does not infringe on the rights of others. As long as the government appears to be supporting this dream it isn't likely to be overthrown.

11/23/2009 9:17:06 AM

Quote :

"Bonus homework assignment: Find out which side, left or right, their revolutions tend to go."

It depends-- will the CIA be funding it?

11/23/2009 9:33:23 AM

No one overthrows the 49th post.

11/23/2009 9:34:22 AM