SACO Poster

[Lycanthrope]

To me this type of stuff falls in the same type of category that Poe's Law fits into. Its happened so many times and if you read the ANCYL FB page that I linked to earlier. Its sometimes hard to tell the real from the fake.

Also true, but then, where would satire be if it wasn't plausible?

My point is that trying to call something like this "hate-speech" when it is obviously fake completely trivialises real incidences of hate-speech.

 

[w1z4rd]

I wonder why the DA Youth have not removed the picture from their facebook or website?

 

[Sinbad]

Also true, but then, where would satire be if it wasn't plausible?

My point is that trying to call something like this "hate-speech" when it is obviously fake completely trivialises real incidences of hate-speech.

So a faked quote can't be hate speech?

 

[Lycanthrope]

Yes I understand what satire is. It is, however different to hayibo in that it was not published on a satire web site, but rather plastered all over a university campus, purporting to be a product of one of the active organisations on said campus.

It contains offensive terms - if similar terms were used to describe black people it would be decried as hate speech immediately. Witness the furore when someone is called a baboon.... but cockroach is ok?

Again, "offence" doesn't equate to "hate-speech."

I might take offence at people referring to things they don't like or consider stupid as "gay" (I don't) but that would still not be hate-speech.

The poster does a good job at illustrating the madness of that organisation and I very well think that's what it set out to do.

I wouldn't be so quick to persecute the author if I were you.

The last two bits are actually pretty amusing, "A VOTE FOR SASCO IS A VOTE FOR MALEMA!!!" and "As SASCO we further sustain our stunts of having them pay for everything." [edited to make sense]

The word "stunts" is a pretty good indicator that this is a jab taken at SASCO.

But oh well... We'll see how this ends sooner or later

 

[Lycanthrope]

So a faked quote can't be hate speech?

It can, but this clearly isn't.

It might offend some people who read it but anyone with a lick of sense would be able to tell that this isn't real and may well even see the humour in it: much of what it mentions are stereotypes which, clearly, people still fall for: "white pigs must leave ZA because they're exploiting us," "our people must multiply to curb this white dominance," "white people want to control our country again, "foreigners are stealing our jobs and our education!"

These are all known and exhausted stereotypes.

It's more likely than not that a white student wrote this.

I'd take it with a bucket of salt and a chuckle.

People just look for an excuse to get riled up about anything that strikes a chord and challenges their safety zone. Understandable, but often very unnecessary.

I would think that, by now, South Africans would be able to recognise hate-speech when they see it: abusive, demeaning and discriminatory; and be able to separate that from satirical hyperbole.

 

[Sinbad]

It can, but this clearly isn't.

It might offend some people who read it but anyone with a lick of sense would be able to tell that this isn't real and may well even see the humour in it: much of what it mentions are stereotypes which, clearly, people still fall for: "white pigs must leave ZA because they're exploiting us," "our people must multiply to curb this white dominance," "white people want to control our country again, "foreigners are stealing our jobs and our education!"

These are all known and exhausted stereotypes.

It's more likely than not that a white student wrote this.

I'd take it with a bucket of salt and a chuckle.

People just look for an excuse for something to get riled up about.

I would think that, by now, South Africans would be able to recognise hate-speech when they see it: abusive, demeaning and discriminatory; and be able to separate that from satirical hyperbole.

Is hate speech defined by its effect on you, or its intention?

Also given the hysterical hyperbole that often spouts from the mouths of certain "leaders" is it not reasonable to assume that this would be taken as serious, rather than satire?

 

[Lycanthrope]

Is hate speech defined by its effect on you, or its intention?

Also given the hysterical hyperbole that often spouts from the mouths of certain "leaders" is it not reasonable to assume that this would be taken as serious, rather than satire?

I agree, it's why I originally said that it's in bad taste and that its intention may very well be lost on the majority. And, frankly, considering the DA Youth's outburst, it was.

I consider hate-speech based on both its intention and its effects but primarily its intention. Hate-speech is a weapon entirely wielded by the bigot.

It reminds me of this: http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/Boy-stabbed-over-racist-hello-20090922

There was no intention toward hate in that article, and yet other people took it upon themselves to interpret it as hate-speech.

I can't condone or support a world in which "offence" is the defining factor in "hate-speech." Hate-speech should be defined by its intent, which is unquestionable.

 

[Sinbad]

I agree, it's why I originally said that it's in bad taste and that it its intention may very well be lost on the majority. And, frankly, considering the DA Youth's outburst, it was.

I consider hate-speech based on both its intention and its effects but primarily its intention. Hate-speech is a weapon entirely wielded by the bigot.

It reminds me of this: http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/Boy-stabbed-over-racist-hello-20090922

There was no intention toward hate in that article, and yet other people took it upon themselves to interpret it as hate-speech.

I can't condone or support a world in which "offence" is the defining factor in "hate-speech." Hate-speech should be defined by its intent, which is unquestionable.

Well I guess we need to wait and see if the intention behind this ever comes out. My impression is that it was intended to polarise. I hope I'm wrong, but I don't think so.

 

[Fudzy]

Is hate speech defined by its effect on you, or its intention?

Also given the hysterical hyperbole that often spouts from the mouths of certain "leaders" is it not reasonable to assume that this would be taken as serious, rather than satire?

Yeah the DASO lost it's sense of humour, created a mountain out of a molehill and now everybody is expected to just chuckle and laugh it off?

Perhaps this is a diversion tactic to pull attention from the vote fixing and overspending that's been highlighted in the news recently?

 

[w1z4rd]

From their Facebook feed:

Democratic Alliance Youth:

We hope it is a fabrication, but if it is then why did SASCO only say something about it when the DA commented today - a full 24hours after it was plastered liberally across two massive university campuses. If it was our brand and we didn't do it we would have acted within minutes to get the posters down and issued a preemptive statement distancing ourselves. SASCO at CPUT would have seen this poster within minutes of arriving on campus on Wed morning. The ANC's logo is also on the poster - all parties silent so far. Not exactly the behavior of innocent people.

 

[AstroTurf]

https://www.facebook.com/groups/103834300022/ yo, some hectic stuff there.

I reported them after reading about 5 posts (for hate speech), hope everyone else does as well.

 

[Lycanthrope]

From their Facebook feed:

Democratic Alliance Youth:

Might not be the behaviour of innocent people but certainly better behaviour than jumping the gun.

It honestly wouldn't surprise me if SASCO are huddled in a circle going, "You mean it WASN'T us? Oh crap..."

 

[thestaggy]

Might not be the behaviour of innocent people but certainly better behaviour than jumping the gun.

It honestly wouldn't surprise me if SASCO are huddled in a circle going, "You mean it WASN'T us? Oh crap..."

Better than ignoring vitriolic statements attributed to your organisation and your associated organisations?

The DA Youth has a point. If indeed these were plastered in huge numbers all over the place and seeing as it is SASCO, an extremely well-supported organisation with immense presence on university campuses, I find it hard to believe they would have missed it.

 

[Sinbad]

Better than ignoring vitriolic statements attributed to your organisation and your associated organisations?

The DA Youth has a point. If indeed these were plastered in huge numbers all over the place and seeing as it is SASCO, an extremely well-supported organisation with immense presence on university campuses, I find it hard to believe they would have missed it.

Most of the sasco members probably read it and thought "Ah, finally, some action taken by our leaders. Good!"

 

[Lycanthrope]

Better than ignoring vitriolic statements attributed to your organisation and your associated organisations?

Who do you take more seriously, and which would you rather side with: an organisation that first considers its options then writes up a proper (and intelligent) rebuke or an over-emotional organisation that gnarls and spits out the first inane self-righteous thoughts that crawl into its skull?

You would think that, especially as a political party, they would focus on their reputation and their decorum first by finding out the facts before issuing any public statements, opinions or contemptuous attacks on other political groups who may well be innocent (on this one wholly off chance).

The DA Youth has a point. If indeed these were plastered in huge numbers all over the place and seeing as it is SASCO, an extremely well-supported organisation with immense presence on university campuses, I find it hard to believe they would have missed it.

Like Sinbad says, it may well be that many of them actually thought it was their own and felt they needed to defend it on a personal level.

I don't know

What I do know is that the poster was written far too articulately (grammatical mistakes and all) to be something a SASCO member would concoct. You're giving them too much credit

 

[thestaggy]

Who do you take more seriously, and which would you rather side with: an organisation that first considers its options then writes up a proper (and intelligent) rebuke or an over-emotional organisation that gnarls and spits out the first inane self-righteous thoughts that crawl into its skull?

You would think that, especially as a political party, they would focus on their reputation and their decorum first by finding out the facts before issuing any public statements, opinions or contemptuous attacks on other political groups who may well be innocent (on this one wholly off chance).

Like Sinbad says, it may well be that many of them actually thought it was their own and felt they needed to defend it on a personal level.

I don't know

What I do know is that the poster was written far too articulately (grammatical mistakes and all) to be something a SASCO member would concoct. You're giving them too much credit

I just don't see how you could let something that inflammatory pass if it is not your doing or stance. And if indeed the notion that it was ignored as it was believed to be official sentiments is true, then that gives the anti-SASCO crowd ammo, no?

Maybe it is a hoax, but as I posted earlier, this is not the first time SASCO has been accused of spewing vitriolic garbage and they are aligned with the ANCYL and we all know how they can go on. So, I would not be surprised if it came from within their own ranks.

 

[Lycanthrope]

I just don't see how you could let something that inflammatory pass if it is not your doing or stance. And if indeed the notion that it was ignored as it was believed to be official sentiments is true, then that gives the anti-SASCO crowd ammo, no?

And in that case, if it was satire (which I'm pretty certain it was), then it did its job by making the bad guys look worse.

Maybe it is a hoax, but as I posted earlier, this is not the first time SASCO has been accused of spewing vitriolic garbage and they are aligned with the ANCYL and we all know how they can go on. So, I would not be surprised if it came from within their own ranks.

Hopefully we get to find out. I'd like some certainty myself

 

[w1z4rd]

Might not be the behaviour of innocent people but certainly better behaviour than jumping the gun.

It honestly wouldn't surprise me if SASCO are huddled in a circle going, "You mean it WASN'T us? Oh crap..."

I think they would have silently removed the pages then. If anything, theyre continuing on with it. No pages removed, same opinions as earlier.

 

[thestaggy]

And in that case, if it was satire (which I'm pretty certain it was), then it did its job by making the bad guys look worse.



Hopefully we get to find out. I'd like some certainty myself

Fair points and probably a more reasonable way to look at it. I'm just saying it wouldn't shock me if this was legit.

 

[Lycanthrope]

I think they would have silently removed the pages then. If anything, theyre continuing on with it. No pages removed, same opinions as earlier.

Too much credit being given to them still. Perhaps I'm just underestimating them but either the poster is by some self-deprecating member who feels it necessary to describe the actions of their organisation and faux ally as "stunts" or it's just a ruse in poor taste by some student who felt like stirring the pot a bit.

I honestly don't know, I just think it seems far too "silly," and far too focussed on far too many stereotypes and far too well-written for the average SASCO member for it to be genuine.

I may very well be wrong, in which case I will graciously apologise and jump over to the burn them at the stake! side of the fence. It just seems far too... I guess... "tactless" to be a legitimate statement.

Fair points and probably a more reasonable way to look at it. I'm just saying it wouldn't shock me if this was legit.

Thank you. It wouldn't shock me either but, well, it just seems too convenient and too articulate for me to think it was done by a member of SASCO.

I really am quite keen to find out the story behind this one though