Jared Taylor. Name ring any bells? No, it didn’t with me either, though perhaps it should have. I am conflicted on this story, and will be asking your opinion at the end.
Jared Taylor is a racist. He calls himself a “white nationalist”, which is just a glossed way of saying ‘white supremacist’, which is merely a varnished way of saying racist, bigot. Taylor is the founder and editor of American Renaissance, a white supremacist online magazine. Taylor is also an author and the president of American Renaissance’s parent organization, New Century Foundation, through which many of his books have been published. He is also the former director of the National Policy Institute, the same organization that Richard Spencer is now President and Director over. In other words, this is one nasty specimen of the human species.
Taylor claims he is not a racist, but instead is a ‘racialist’ and claims his views are “consistent with the views of most of the great statesmen and presidents of America’s past”. He calls himself a “proponent of scientific racism” and “believes that there are racial differences in intelligence among the various ethno-racial groups across the world.”
Just researching for this piece has made me ill. This is not a man, this is a monster. Taylor argues that Blacks are generally less intelligent than Hispanics, while Hispanics are generally less intelligent than whites. To be fair, he also believes that Asians are intellectually superior to whites, saying …
“I think Asians are objectively superior to Whites by just about any measure that you can come up with in terms of what are the ingredients for a successful society. This doesn’t mean that I want America to become Asian.”
About African-Americans, he says …
“Blacks and whites are different. When blacks are left entirely to their own devices, Western civilization — any kind of civilization — disappears.”
Okay, so now you have a pretty good idea of how this monster thinks, right. Well, what brought him onto my radar today is the fact that he has filed a lawsuit against Twitter, for Twitter shuttered his accounts for ‘abusive content’. The suit, filed in San Francisco Superior Court on Feb. 20, argues that Twitter suspended the accounts because it didn’t like the nature of Taylor’s and American Renaissance’s tweets, not because they violated its rules.
Twitters latest updated policy includes a ban on promoting violence and hate in usernames or bios, possible permanent suspension of accounts that threaten violence or death and a ban on accounts that feature hate symbols and images. Twitter said the suspensions are in line with its “terms of service” and that the accounts are “affiliated with a violent extremist group.”
Now this is where I am conflicted. I have no love, no use for people like Mr. Taylor and his organization of racists and bigots. I would spit in his face if I ever came that close to him. But … there is the 1st Amendment which protects freedom of speech, and I have always been in support of those protections. As I have said before on this blog, once we try to narrow the definition of precisely what speech is protected, once we try to exclude one type of speech, we run onto a slippery slope where … well, where does it stop? If, for example, we wish to ban hate speech such as Mr. Taylor’s or Mr. Spencer’s, then do we ban my posts ranting about Donald Trump?
Frankly, I am to the point that I could easily support a re-writing of both the 1st and 2nd Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. But, there is no one person, no one body of lawmakers that I would trust to do those re-writes, so I suppose they are better left alone.
But back to the point. I do not support people like Mr. Taylor or any other promoter of racism or any form of bigotry. I do not wish to see them on Twitter or Facebook, or in my corner supermarket. But … does that mean that anybody has a right to ban them or put fences around their freedom of speech? I. Don’t. Know. I do know that in most of the EU there is free speech, but there are limitations, particularly in areas of Nazi symbols and speech, for the Europeans still have fresh memories of Hitler and his Third Reich. Here in the U.S., the average citizen was largely unaffected and even today, neo-Nazi’s are widely tolerated in certain parts of the country, brushed off as if they are nothing but children playing at war.
I think that hate speech is wrong. I think that bigotry in any form is wrong. No one person is better than another based on race, ethnicity, religion, gender, gender identification, or any other superficial criteria. I think that any form of hatred against a group of people has no place on social media, for its only goal is to stir people up and potentially lead to violence. Thus, I support the ban, but not without some reservations.
Help me out here. Weigh in on this topic and let me know your thoughts.
Thank you for your input!