Social Inside the White-Only Settlement in Arkansas: The Group Building a 'Fortress for the White Race'

[CantCucktheTuck]

The only real question is if it is legal for a private property owner, where the property isn't open to the public, to decide who can and can not reside on that property. Either every person has that right or no one has that right. Arguing about the morality of the decision isn't really relevant to the law.

 

[cooks1]

Maybe true, but there were a lot of extenuating circumstancess that lead to the Nazi Party gaining control. I don't see any sort of catalyst for something like that happening here in the near future.

If these people do something illegal, they should be arrested. But I don't think anyone should have serious fears about a group of dumb fucks.

Yes?
Y'all really need to stop working yourselves into shoots.

This is an on-line MMA forum gents. No one is over here shitting themselves and building bunkers. I'm having a beer and discussing the merits of these backwater racist fucks being allowed to build their own little racist utopia town here in the US. I don't support it. I gave my reasons.

Do you have any reason to support it other than your 'it's no big deal' apathy?

 

[Aurelian]

This is an on-line MMA forum gents. No one is over here shitting themselves and building bunkers. I'm having a beer and discussing the merits of these backwater racist fucks being allowed to build their own little racist utopia town here in the US. I don't support it. I gave my reasons.

Do you have any reason to support it other than your 'it's no big deal' apathy?

I'm not supporting it. I'm trying to give you comfort to rest your fears here. This country is fucking filled with people like this who think this way. It's a failure on the state to not reach out to these rural areas and give them a better education and to modernize them more and bring them up to speed with the current times. It's just an unfortunate fact of life we have to deal with.

If they commit a crime, they will be arrested. Simple as. What people seem to advocating is a violent solution, which isn't the answer.

 

[Rob Battisti]

The only real question is if it is legal for a private property owner, where the property isn't open to the public, to decide who can and can not reside on that property. Either every person has that right or no one has that right. Arguing about the morality of the decision isn't really relevant to the law.

That sounds about right

 

[My Spot]

This is an on-line MMA forum gents. No one is over here shitting themselves and building bunkers. I'm having a beer and discussing the merits of these backwater racist fucks being allowed to build their own little racist utopia town here in the US. I don't support it. I gave my reasons.

Do you have any reason to support it other than your 'it's no big deal' apathy?

Way to expose yourself though.

 

[cooks1]

The only real question is if it is legal for a private property owner, where the property isn't open to the public, to decide who can and can not reside on that property. Either every person has that right or no one has that right. Arguing about the morality of the decision isn't really relevant to the law.

Well.................. there is a difference between an individual person's property and and a town....or even a neighborhood.

A person can be as racist as they want in their home or on their property. They are not required to invite minorities over for dinner. But the minute public money or public services go into it, it's not legal to discriminate.

Can an individual homeowner discriminate? Yes. Can a Homeowners association? No.

 

[I Am Legion]

Fuck these asshats.....although if they have a movie theater, may be a nice option.

 

[DoctorTaco]

no gays is my favorite part. Have you seen what gay people do to neighborhoods? They take immaculate care of their lawns and homes, plant flowers and trees, and bring up property values. If I need to borrow a tool I’m asking a lesbian- I guarantee it’s right where it should be in her garage, well kept and in working condition.

 

[nostradumbass]

It is not. Freedom was proposed to be a black run community open to anyone who considers themselves an "ally" to black people.

This is a white nationalist community which is proposing denying non whites housing in that area (which is illegal).

Different circumstances conceptually and legally

Lol, so non blacks could move there, they just can't run anything, own anything, and have to view themselves as 2nd class subservients to the owners who have to be black. So basically a plantation with a racial hierachy is somehow better to you than 40 people in the Ozarks buying some land and wanting to be left alone?

And it's private property and a private membership club, not illegal. It's illegal if it's open to the public, which it's not, or they could lose federal funding, which they already don't get.

 

[Mujeriego]

I do not. Amish and Musilms are not putting flyers like this and spreading hate. There are more than 2 million Christians in Saudi Arabia
and they are doing alright.

I don't see Mexicans forbidden.
You think hes watching Canelo-Crawford in September?

 

[luckyshot]

I guess as long as they are just private people buying private land it's whatever. But you can't actually build a "whites only city."

That's illegal.

 

[Sinister]

Why?

Because it's illegal, as has been explained umpteen times in this thread already

 

[Sinister]

Huh? You don’t think it’s relevant?

No. Freedom Georgia was not and is not "blacks only."

Not relevant at all

 

[Sinister]

The only viable solution to stop people from spreading hateful rhetoric is to give them some sort of education. People are going to spread this type of hate speech no matter where they live. Unless people are advocating for a violent solution, which I don't think so.

But @TeTe has it right. The trash typically take themselves out.

No they don't. They clean up and normalize their rhetoric, so that when they make an expressly racist community there will be argument as to its validity as opposed to outright rejection and disbanding.

 

[oldshadow]

These people have freedom of speech and freedom of association as long as they follow the law which i support.

However that does not mean freedom from consequence as long as its legal and peaceful.

 

[Aurelian]

No they don't. They clean up and normalize their rhetoric, so that when they make an expressly racist community there will be argument as to its validity as opposed to outright rejection and disbanding.

In my experience, loser people fuck their own lives. I don't expect these people to have any sort of success and will likely end up in jail or broke or some other tragic shit they do to themselves.

There's probably millions upon millions of people who think and feel this way. There's not much to do about it except try to educate them and modernize them.

You can't just enact a genocide. These people exist. We have to deal with it and make efforts into changing it. But it has to be civil.

 

[Sinister]

The only real question is if it is legal for a private property owner, where the property isn't open to the public, to decide who can and can not reside on that property. Either every person has that right or no one has that right. Arguing about the morality of the decision isn't really relevant to the law.

You can be a racist in the confines of your own home, but not to engage with society based on that premise. You can own a house and never let black people into YOUR house as guests. You cannot rent a room in your house and advertise "no negroes." People always try to use the notion of Freedom of Association (meant to protect worker's Unions) and the notion of "private clubs" as a more sanitized way of being racists, but its dubious at best and when private schools tried to use that argument to not allow minorities to attend, it didnt work

 

[Sinister]

In my experience, loser people fuck their own lives. I don't expect these people to have any sort of success and will likely end up in jail or broke or some other tragic shit they do to themselves.

There's probably millions upon millions of people who think and feel this way. There's not much to do about it except try to educate them and modernize them.

You can't just enact a genocide. These people exist. We have to deal with it and make efforts into changing it. But it has to be civil.

Yeah that's not necessarily what I mean. What I'm saying is groups of people who think this way and want to promote their ideas in these manners dont just disband and forget about it. They do this. Try to find legal dubious ways to form communities, to spread, they sanitize their rhetoric and infiltrate school boards, they run for office and then want to enact policies that agree with their stupidity.

I dont see any use in shoulder-shrugging these efforts. As you say education defeats it, so the more people learn about them and just why they're idiots, the better.

 

[Simple Southerner]

On the bright side that clown mack got banned....no worries he'll be back...they always come back

 

[GreatSaintGuillotine]

Lol, so non blacks could move there, they just can't run anything, own anything, and have to view themselves as 2nd class subservients to the owners who have to be black. So basically a plantation with a racial hierachy is somehow better to you than 40 people in the Ozarks buying some land and wanting to be left alone?

Dude wtf are you talking about? You literally made a bunch of bullshit up to get mad about. That's not at all what I said nor what Freedom was. There was no hierarchy and no limits of who could have lived there, run shit, or owned anything.

You need to take a step back and reset man.

And it's private property and a private membership club, not illegal. It's illegal if it's open to the public, which it's not, or they could lose federal funding, which they already don't get.

This isn't a club. It is an attempt to make town/community with housing, businesses, and other resources. All of which cannot be denied based on race. That is illegal