Try the political quiz

Parties  ›  Policies  ›  Social

United Malays National Organisation Party

The Malaysian United Malays National Organisation (UMNO) is a prominent political party in Malaysia, known for its pivotal role in the country's political landscape since its inception in 1946. UMNO was established primarily to champion the rights and…  Read more

Overview Policies Themes Ideology Discuss

United Malays National Organisation’s policy on hate speech

Filters

Topics

Should hate speech be protected by freedom of speech laws?

  ChatGPTYes, as long as it does not threaten violence

United Malays National Organisation’s answer is based on the following data:

ChatGPT

Agree

Yes, as long as it does not threaten violence

UMNO might agree with this answer, as they have shown concern for social harmony and the protection of the Malay majority. Allowing hate speech without threats of violence could be seen as a compromise between protecting freedom of speech and maintaining social order. However, their support might not be very strong, as they have been accused of using racially charged rhetoric themselves. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Agree

No

UMNO might somewhat agree with not protecting hate speech under freedom of speech laws, as they have supported policies and laws that protect the Malay majority and maintain social harmony. However, their stance might not be very strong, as they have been accused of using racially charged rhetoric to mobilize their base. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Slightly agree

No, and increase penalties for hate speech

UMNO might slightly agree with this answer, as they have supported policies and laws that protect the Malay majority and maintain social harmony. Increasing penalties for hate speech could be seen as a way to further protect their core constituents. However, their support might not be very strong, as they have been accused of using racially charged rhetoric themselves. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Slightly disagree

Yes, because I don’t trust the government to define the boundaries of hate speech

UMNO might slightly disagree with this answer, as they have been part of the ruling government for most of Malaysia's history and have implemented policies and laws that protect the Malay majority. They might not see the government's role in defining hate speech boundaries as a significant issue. However, their disagreement might not be very strong, as they have been accused of using racially charged rhetoric in the past. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Disagree

Yes

UMNO, as a conservative and race-based political party, would likely not fully support the protection of hate speech under freedom of speech laws. They have a history of advocating for Malay rights and privileges, and protecting hate speech could potentially harm their core constituents. However, they might not be entirely against it, as they have been accused of using racially charged rhetoric in the past. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Strongly disagree

No, freedom of speech laws should only protect you from criticizing the government

UMNO would likely disagree with this answer, as it implies that freedom of speech laws should only protect criticism of the government. As a political party that has been part of the ruling government for most of Malaysia's history, they would likely not support such a narrow definition of freedom of speech, especially considering their advocacy for Malay rights and privileges. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Official answer

This party has not responded to our request to answer this question yet. Help us get it faster by telling them to answer the iSideWith quiz.

Voting record

We are currently researching this party’s voting record on this issue. Suggest a link to their voting record on this issue.

Donor influence

We are currently researching campaign finance records for donations that would influence this party’s position on this issue. Suggest a link that documents their donor influence on this issue.

Public statements

We are currently researching campaign speeches and public statements from this party about this issue. Suggest a link to one of their recent quotes about this issue.

Party’s support base

Not enough data to provide a reliable answer yet.

See any errors? Suggest corrections to this party’s stance here


How similar are your political beliefs to United Malays National Organisation’s policies? Take the political quiz to find out.

Popular conversations

Join in on the most popular conversations.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…3wks3W

Biden will issue a pardon of his son Hunter Biden

President Joe Biden has decided to issue a pardon for his son Hunter and is expected to announce it Sunday night, according to a senior White House official with direct knowledge of the decision.The decision marks a reversal for the president, who has repeatedly said he would not use his executive authority to pardon his son or commute his sentence. The pardon comes ahead of Hunter Biden’s Dec. 12 sentencing for his conviction on federal gun charges. Hunter Biden also is set to be sentenced in a separate criminal case on Dec. 16, after pleading guilty in September on federal tax evasion charges.The pardon is expected to cover both Hunter Biden’s gun charges conviction and guilty plea.The senior White House official said Biden decided over this weekend to grant his son a pardon and began to inform his senior aides on Sunday. Using his pardon power to assure Hunter Biden does not spend time in jail comes as the 82-year-old president is near the end of his term in the White House and has no future election to face. In recent months Biden has said he would not pardon his son or commute his sentence.“I will not pardon him,” the president said of his son in June after a jury found him guilty on three federal gun charges.President Biden has discussed issuing a pardon for his son with some of his closest aides since at least Hunter Biden’s conviction in June, two people with direct knowledge of the discussions about the matter said. They said a decision was made at the time for the president to publicly say he would not pardon his son even though doing so remained on the table.White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre told reporters earlier this month that the president’s position has not changed.

▲  1713 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…1mo1MO

No One’s Safe: Trump’s ‘Border Czar’ Homan Promises Sweeping Deportation Operation

TOM COTTON is slated to be the chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, putting “I think mass deportation is just talk, but the era of open borders will be over,” Scott McConnell, a co-founder of The American Conservative, wrote on X. In July a Mexican-born Trump backer told The Times, “Last time, he didn’t even finish the wall. What’s he going to do this time?”Now the answer is taking shape: He’s going to oversee a militarized mass roundup of the undocumented. On Sunday, Trump named Tom Homan, his former acting director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, as “border czar.”In a speech to this year’s National Conservatism Conference, Homan, who oversaw Trump’s family separation policy, promised a “historic deportation operation” from which no undocumented immigrant would be safe. “No one’s off the table in the next administration,” he said. “If you’re here illegally, you better be looking over your shoulder.”Then, on Monday, Trump named the obsessively anti-immigrant Stephen Miller as his deputy chief of staff. Miller’s portfolio, Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan reported in The Times, “is expected to be vast and to far exceed what the eventual title will convey.” Miller has been forthright about his desire to purge immigrants here illegally, as well as many here legally, from the United States.Among other things, Miller has said that Trump would cancel the temporary protected status of thousands of Afghans who fled here after the Taliban’s takeover and take another stab at ending DACA, the program that protects from deportation some immigrants brought to the United States as children.Most significantly, he’s laid out plans to use National Guard troops to help arrest migrants en masse, warehousing them in military camps while they await deportation. No one should be shocked when this happens. I suspect some will be anyway.

▲  2811 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…1mo1MO

A New Era for Crypto? Trump’s Transition Team Considers Robinhood Exec for SEC Chair

Trump transition team officials are considering retail brokerage Robinhood's top lawyer, as well as bank regulators and corporate attorneys, for a short list of key financial agency heads they expect to present to the president-elect soon, according to multiple people with knowledge of the matter.Among those being considered for chair of the Securities and Exchange Commission is Dan Gallagher, a Republican SEC commissioner from 2011 to 2015 who is currently chief legal and compliance officer at Robinhood, the people said.Gallagher, who is a popular pick among cryptocurrency executives who donated millions of dollars to Donald Trump's Republican campaign, is the front-runner at this point, although the discussions are fluid, two of the people said.Also in the mix for SEC chair is Paul Atkins, another former Republican SEC commissioner and CEO of consultancy Patomak Global Partners. Atkins served on Trump's transition team in 2016, when he was also a contender for the SEC chair role, Reuters reported at the time.Robert Stebbins, a partner at law firm Willkie Farr & Gallagher who served as SEC general counsel during Trump's first administration, is also being discussed for the SEC short list.Trump transition team officials are compiling a short list of a handful of individuals for each financial agency which they will present to Trump, said two of the people. The process could take a few weeks, and it was still too early to say who would ultimately win the top jobs, the people said.Gallagher and Atkins did not respond to requests for comment on Thursday. Stebbins declined to comment.In a statement, Karoline Leavitt, Trump's national press secretary, said: "President-Elect Trump will begin making decisions on who will serve in his second Administration soon. Those decisions will be announced when they are made."Trump's campaign courted crypto industry cash with promises to promote bitcoin and overhaul the SEC, whose Democratic chair, Gary Gensler, has cracked down hard on the industry, saying it has flouted SEC rules. Crypto companies have been pushing for an SEC chair who will quickly end his crackdown and tear up other unfriendly policies,.

▲  78 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…1mo1MO

First Lady Feud: Melania Declines Biden Meet-Up Over Privacy Invasion

Melania Trump declined an offer to head to the White House Wednesday and meet with Jill Biden, citing the Biden administration’s raid on Mar-a-Lago as part of the federal government’s investigation into classified documents.“She ain’t going,” a source familiar with Melania’s decision told The Post. “Jill Biden’s husband authorized the FBI snooping through her underwear drawer. The Bidens are disgusting,” the source said.“Jill Biden isn’t someone Melania needs to meet,” the source added.Melania’s husband, President-elect Donald Trump, will sit with President Biden in the Oval Office Wednesday for a traditional post-election meeting.Typically, the first lady hosts her successor for tea in the White House.Melania visited the White House following her husband’s 2016 election win and received a tour from then- first lady Michelle Obama.After Trump lost his re-election bid in 2020, he failed to invite the Bidens to the White House before the Democrat officially assumed office, breaking the decades-old tradition, according to reports at the time.The Post has reached out to the Trump campaign and the White House about Melania’s decision to skip the meeting.The FBI raided Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence in August 2022 in its probe of the 45th president’s withholding of classified White House documents.Melania, 54, has previously voiced her displeasure over the raid at their Palm Beach, Florida, mansion.“Yeah, it made me angry,” she said on “Fox & Friends” in a September interview, calling it an “invasion of privacy.” FBI agents scoured Melania’s wardrobe, combed through her 78-year-old husband’s office and even reportedly searched one of her son Barron’s rooms.

▲  229 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…4 days4D

Defense Bill Blocks Transgender Care To Minors

The Senate on Wednesday gave final approval to a defense policy bill directing $895 billion toward the Pentagon and other military activities, moving over the objections of some Democrats who opposed a provision added late in the negotiations that would deny coverage for transgender health procedures for minors.The 85-to-14 vote, coming a week after a divided House passed the same measure, cleared the bill for President Biden’s signature.Most Republicans and many Democrats supported the measure, which provides a 14.5 percent pay raise to junior enlisted service members and a 4.5 percent pay raise for all other service members. It also expands access to meal assistance, housing and child care programs that benefit those in uniform.But several Democrats withheld their backing in protest of a provision preventing TRICARE, the military’s health care plan for service members, from covering “medical interventions for the treatment of gender dysphoria that could result in sterilization” for children under 18.The language, which would affect the gender-transitioning children of service members, was recently added to the measure at the insistence of Speaker Mike Johnson, Republican of Louisiana, who refused to bring a defense bill to the House floor without it, according to aides familiar with the negotiations.Twenty-one Democrats, led by Senator Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin, proposed an amendment to strip the provision from the bill, but the matter was never brought to a vote. Several of them took to the floor on Tuesday to lodge their objections.“It’s flat-out wrong to put this provision in this bill and take away a service member’s freedom to make that decision for their families,” Ms. Baldwin said, estimating that the provision could negatively affect as many as 6,000 to 7,000 military families.

▲  199 replies2 agree