http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/01/us/milo-yiannopoulo…
Although I support peoples' right to protest full scale rioting like this will only help the other side in the long run. This is the sort of shit that will lead to 8 years of Trump followed by 8 years of Pence (8T8P(tm)). The far left will drive moderates and classical liberals away from the Democrats if they get their way. Thoughts?
This isn't a protest, this is denying people the right to hear other points of view. Every student who exceeded standard protesting should be expelled and arrested if possible.
Another examples of the fascism of the left. Btw, this isn't the fiRst time this guys been shit down. schools attempt to charge him for security, financially silencing him.
I agree, the same could be said for people on the right . Difference is extreme right wing behavior isn't tolerated whereas this is acceptable on far too many campuses.
Please define on what basis you're arriving at the conclusion that extreme right wing behavior is not tolerated whereas extreme left behavior is "acceptable" - I assume you're speaking in terms of violence.
I'm just curious what evidence / statistics you're using to make this claim and hold this belief - not looking for a diatribe on what you've personally experienced or any intrinsic "feeling" you get from what news sources you choose to or not to absorb.
If we're speaking from a lack of evidence and just anecdotally what we've seen, then personally I've seen many, many people on the "left" or liberal side of the political spectrum denouncing this behavior and claiming it was the actions of a select few, and not the view of the entire party at all. There is a host of articles and sources you can use to see how many people are condemning the act, but if you choose not to believe them, no amount of evidence will suffice.
There's plenty of extremists on both sides of the spectrum that are not and should not be tolerated, but it's disingenuous to caveat your dismay with "but the left is still worse" onto every reply you make, with absolutely no evidence to back these claims up. You're getting into conspiracy territory and again, if you truly hate the media for what bias and false claims they make, then be better than them - show the community how you'd like the news to be portrayed and provide examples, evidence, support to your claims, just as you would want done when people trash Trump.
Is it so hard to just simply agree?
If you're looking for DOJ stats, there are none. That doesn't make it not true.
When's the last time you saw conservatives rioting and destroying a college campus? When did you hear about a Hillary supporter getting knocked out at a protest. Every republican is called "literally " hitler. You ever see what black people who meet with trump are called?
Go on campus and openly espouse conservative views and watch how fast you're blackballed or straight kicked out. Feelings are supreme now and it only cuts one way.
You see it all over. It's not paranoia, it's being observant. And let's be real. No amount of links or evidence will convince you so let's just agree to disagree.
Except that goes both ways. No amount of links or "evidence" will convince you as it's all been done before - whenever you are presented with a video of the right acting violent or belligerent, you're the first one to say they're "the exception."
What exactly is called being "observant"? You're on every college campus these days, and have personally gotten kicked out or silenced for holding conservative views? If you aren't personally travelling to these campuses, the question still remains to be answered: where are you getting your information from?
You claim that the media is all lies, fake news, you can't trust anything, yet you have no qualms about producing beliefs that can't be proven, and offer no sources for where you're getting your material - surely you aren't traveling across the nation on your own college tour and doing personal studies on the matter.
Your claim that just because there are no supporting DOJ facts doesn't make it "not true" is a fallacy. There are no DOJ facts to support the claim that you're not Milo himself, sitting behind your computer trolling WSO - "doesn't make it not true". You make a claim, you should know the onus is on you to provide evidence for that claim, not the other party to prove it is false. That is along the lines of arguing from ignorance.
Again, you went on a personal diatribe and shouted claims that all I need to do is "go on campus" and see for myself? You should know that isn't anything related to reliable evidence. I can say the same thing back "go on campus, and see for yourself - what you're saying is not true." Doesn't convince you, right?
And also, here you go:
And here are some "actual facts" on the matter, and an entire wikipedia article to substantiate:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_terrorism
How about we stop making claims that can't be verified? Just like you wish of the media.
It is just so perplexing at how vehemently you presented "manufactured outrage" at the biased/"lying" media, yet here you are, making claims that if I didn't hear about something in the media, it doesn't happen. I'm not even going to get into the argument of trying to convince you certain statements are true based on "but you just need to go outside and SEE!" You sound like one of those conspiracy theorists, dude.
Whether or not you agree with Milo's views on Progressivism and Trump, this feeds perfectly into his narratives
Both the far left and the far right can go fuck themselves, those are my thoughts.
Agree, except its socially acceptable for the far left to do this shit, whereas the far right is universally condemned.
Could you imagine a scenario where far right members of college shut down a liberalized speakers? You violate someone's safe space and you're kicked out yet these ppl destroy college property to prevent people from hearing this attention whore speak
It clearly shows that this kind of stunt has institutional support, there was no arrests, yet there's a million of videos out there clearly showing these "protesters" violently attacking people and destroying property. Looks at these quotes....
“We won’t put up with the violent rhetoric of Milo, Trump or the fascistic alt-right,” said a Berkeley history student who declined to give his name. The student, who was dressed in black and wore a face mask, carried a banner that read “Queers bash back”. He said he identified with the “antifa” (anti-fascist) movement.
“We are willing to resist by any means necessary,” he added.
Lana Wachowski, another protester, defended using extreme tactics to deny Yiannopolous a platform. “The moral imperative is to win,” she said. “There’s something to be said for fighting according to a code, but if you lose, people are going to die. People are going to get deported.
“It’s absolutely acceptable to use violence. They are 100% certain to use it against us.”
Absolutely. These people think they have a moral right to deny people the right to hear this guy.
Liberal fascism.
I saw the pictures/videos of the unconscious guy getting beat on the ground with pipes/shovels and the girl getting pepper sprayed while giving an interview. Absolutely unreal. And apparently the police were told to stand down.
Knowing some friends who were at other schools in the UC system, I'm assuming it is a fun place.. So I am wondering if they are just bored in their dorms with nothing better to do but riot because anarchy looks like fun? Or if they are just batshit crazy....
isn't it awesome to know you will be infinitely more successful than these peasants?
Really unfortunate that this happened at Cal. They really should be secure enough with their position to let him speak... as hearing different viewpoints is absolutely core to the history of that University. I do enjoy seeing students being active across the UC system right now (including my alma mater in La Jolla). While I probably don't agree with everything (or even most) of what they're protesting at this point, I think it's a really critical part of the student experience, and its good to care about SOMETHING. Just wish they would do so peacefully.
Given Godwin's Law has been suspended for the term of Trump's presidency, I'll make some broad comparisons to Nazi Germany.
After Hitler got into the Chancellery around 1933, he worked on winning over the German middle class and establishment. This meant distancing himself from the street brawlers of the SA and giving the NSDAP a respectable face that the middle classes were willing to accept. Among other things, this led to the Rohm's putsch/Night of the Long Knives and the rise of the SS (more crisp, professional and acceptable to the middle class). Less personal and property crime, less anti-semitic statements, more a look of the people your mother would be happy having over for tea.
I think we're at a point in US history where Trump's base and the dyed-in-the-wool anti-Trump camps are both baked in. However, there's a large middle ground who can be swayed.
Where these types of radicals in the anti-Trump, "antifa" movement do themselves and the country a disservice is punching Nazis, property damage and denying people the right to speak. That sort of stuff alienates the middle class and drives them to greater sympathy for the Trump side of things.
The radicals may detest the boring middle road population, but winning over that middle road, middle class population is vital for any side of politics in a land of 51/49 election results.
Unfortunately, I fear the Romantic notions of the left radicals will overcome rationality. We live in age increasingly dominated by Romantic thinking, on all sides. This does not end well.
EDIT: If I was going to head deep into loose 1930s Germany comparison, I'd say Bannon may be purged like Rohm was. In Bannon's case, he'd be a convenient fall guy on whom Trump could pin the fuck ups of the last few weeks. Like Rohm and the SA, Bannon was useful for getting Trump into office. His usefulness may have been exhausted in that and Trump may now try to create a more respectable front to convert more of the non-deplorable centre into his base. Even if Bannon is exiled from the Whitehouse, large swathes of the deplorable base aren't going to flee to anyone else. Many have bought into Trump's Romantic cult of personality.
On the other hand, I don't see Trump as tracking neatly along a Hitler path, suspension of Godwin's Law notwithstanding.
EDIT EDIT: Much of the same tactics re: winning over the centre, pinning your failures on fall guys etc can be applied to many experiences in politics, not just 1930s Germany. I just happen to be focused on 1930s German history at the moment.
EDIT EDIT EDIT: To distinguish further, I don't think Trump has a pathological hatred of any specific ethnic or religious groups like Hitler did. I see him as a populist who will seize on whatever currents take him where he wants to go. At this point in US history (like many), religion and race are pretty powerful currents that a populist can harness. In the age of Huey Long, wealth inequality was a more powerful current.
So, unlike 1930s Germany, I'm less worried that Trump is running a deceptive cover while he plans for a Final Solution of any type. On the other hand, as Trump looks like an unprincipled populist demogogue, I'm more worried about where the tide of populism could carry him and/or where he may lead it.
Impressive grasp of German history. I'm currently in the middle of a 1k pg book on the History of the 3rd Reich and just learning about some of this stuff.
I would add another parallel - 1930s Germany was about restoring Germany to its prior glory of pre-WW1, Trump is MAGA. Its quite a compelling campaign tactic.
I think where things diverge is that Hitler basically laid everything out in his Manifesto if people bothered to look - taking over more land for the benefit of the German race, the purity of the German race etc. Sure Trump has his 100 day plan, but that's about it. There's no sinister ulterior motive (as far as I can see).
I also don't think Trump dumps Bannon. Bringing him on board coincided with the resurrection of his campaign. I think Trump looks to him a lot for strategy/policy, etc, whereas Hitler was the brains behind the whole operation.
Shirer?
This is pretty terrible. That said, just as a point of reference re: Cal, the University and student body are pretty vehemently pushing back on this having been done by anyone affiliated with the University. There was a peaceful protest going on earlier when masked agitators showed up, who according to the university, have shown up at other Berkeley protests. Similar to what happened when you had a few masked people incite violence in DC when the otherwise peaceful women's March was going on.
See here: http://www.californiagoldenblogs.com/2017/2/2/14482840/anarchists-uc-be…
Take that fwiw, but all in all shit like this can't be tolerated and, as much as I think Milo is an absolutely disgusting human being, he has as much right as anyone to his viewpoints.
If I were Milo, I'd launch a campaign about Berkley students being anti-gay. He could easily pull the "They made fires as a way to symbolize the burning of fags" angle. Nothing would ruin these snowflakes self esteem like being called homophobic.
Would be an enjoyable troll post to see.
Post-election, I have heard many on the far left talk about resisting/fighting back by any means necessarily, civil war, and the like. And we have obviously seen violent behavior almost exclusively from the left (fact).
Maybe it is the lack of protests from those with a more conservative bent, but do liberals really think that if there was any sort of civil war type conflict between the right and left, the left would win? I giggle every time I think about it.
Babies throwing a fit just make the parents more resolute.
Similar violence erupted on NYU's campus last night when a Vice News reporter came to speak.
I saw the video of the professor demanding the police beat up the alt-right people so her students didn't have to do it themselves. She demanded this unironically after yelling about the importance of human rights. FFS...
Since TNA has gotten his liberals are intolerant rant out of the way, let me present an alternative viewpoint:
We aren't always perfectly rational beings. Sometimes, we'll absorb new ideas and take action without really considering what these ideas mean. For those that have studied a bit of social psychology, you'll know what I'm talking about.
Milo has openly called African Americans apes while stating that members of the LGBT community should be "forced back into the closet". He makes a living by empowering the worst kind of ignorance. Do you really think ideas like that deserve to be heard (and thus spread), just for the sake of free speech?
This isn't a debate about what the corporate tax rate should be. These are openly extremist positions that even Trump wouldn't take on. No sane person would. Milo tries to spread these ideas because it gives him attention, furthering his influence and career. Just personally, I would probably react the same way as these UCB students if I saw someone trying to take away the happiness of my friends and community for his own selfish reasons.
Ad iste vel sint qui nulla. Libero asperiores quam sit architecto soluta repellendus dolore. Exercitationem sunt esse non aut nesciunt at ut nulla. Facilis voluptate placeat maxime mollitia.
Ut sed est dolorem ducimus. Officia non beatae cupiditate nemo ea voluptate. Nulla voluptatem voluptatum aut officiis perferendis.
Sed qui impedit et consequatur maiores expedita quo. Repellendus laudantium ut qui qui dolorum. Accusantium excepturi repellat magnam sint. Consequatur consectetur placeat cum illum totam cum. Impedit aperiam voluptas nobis est accusantium aut nam. Quia quo et ut placeat.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Ullam et blanditiis reprehenderit ducimus rem. Dolor nobis officia qui quisquam ut soluta omnis.
Perspiciatis omnis excepturi at quo quia tenetur harum. Perferendis omnis quidem magni ut aperiam itaque illum. Veniam quidem et aut voluptatem commodi.