The Whitest Kids U' Know - I want to kill the president
Weidmann1 HN recommenders · 2019–2023
862K views · comedy · evergreen · Uploaded 2013-07-20
A short Whitest Kids U' Know sketch, with Spanish subtitles, in which a man repeatedly announces he wants to kill the president. It satirizes how speech and threats are policed.
Used as a joke or satire reference in moderation, free-speech and police threads.
57:19Republic, Lost | Lawrence Lessig | Talks at Google
Talks at Google
21:08Christopher Hitchens - Free Speech
hitch archive
51:22USENIX Security '18-Q: Why Do Keynote Speakers Keep Suggesting That Improving Security Is Possible?
USENIX
36:47Harder Drive: Hard drives we didn't want or need
suckerpinch
2:58The Loving Trap
Ben Woodhams
18:20We the People, and the Republic we must reclaim | Lawrence Lessig
TED
9:04Jackie Chan - How to Do Action Comedy
Every Frame a Painting
19:08NaN Gates and Flip FLOPS
suckerpinch
5 comments from Hacker News
> Let's start with curbing speech that encourages harming others. No doubt, explicit threats or advocacy/conspiracy to violence exist, and should not be tolerated. However, there are countless complicated grey areas subject to interpretation and potential bias. Was Kathy Griffin advocating violence by holding up a mock Trump severed head? Is “Abortion stops a beating heart” a coded message to inspire violence against abortion doctors? What about “Eat the rich” or “The only good billionaire is a dead billionaire”? My favorite edge case is this WKYK sketch, which is clearly satire, yet trivial to indict as an explicit call to unlawful violence: [VIDEO]
I recommend digging back into TD.W posts from the 4th and 5th; while most content wouldn't pass a strict test of an explicit threat, their clear intent was not to protest or express dissent, but to prevent vote certification from taking place, along with the usual invectives about "helicopter rides" and "Day of the Rope", etc. The line is very tricky, as to what constitutes colorful metaphor, vs. explicit calls to violence. (My favorite satire on this dilemma: [VIDEO] ) Regardless, the emotional energy and goals of that community on Jan 6th was extremely clear: to alter the due process of law by threat of force. All that said, I'm quasi-absolutist on free speech issues, for the slippery-slope reasons you describe. Free speech doesn't end at 1A: it's a cultural value as well. Yet, it's also a tall order to enforce that value proactively: if a newspaper is not obligated to print every letter, should Twitter be obligated to let everyone have an account? There's a good argument for a "digital commons", and regulating tech giants as utilities; but the balance between an individual's freedom to share offensive views, and the freedom of service providers to choose to whom they offer service, is extremely murky.
My all time favorite Trevor Moore sketch: "I want to kill the president". [VIDEO] It showcases his wonderful way of speaking, his body language, the use of music to communicate the joke. The world is a less humorous place today.
> Or “Russian oligarchs put plutonium in Putin’s coffee”. Saying that about the US president who was bankrolling a trillion dollars-plus invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan would have put one in jail, interesting to see that when applied to another country is now perfectly ok. Relevant Whitest Kids U' Know sketch [1] [1] [VIDEO]
Your passphrase could be "I want to kill the President of the United States of America" USSS, please refer to: [VIDEO]