NationStates

Eisarn-Ara wrote:Anarchic ruffians are digging their own goddamn holes; and by the gods, they are tripping themselves into the gaping maws of those very same holes they cut into the cold ground, almost as if their hubris & narcissism functioned like a spade to dig a grave for their ideology. And when these people are rounded up, arrested in mass or "disappeared", they'll have to remember that by taking the identity politics suppository with such gusto, they in-effect did all of that damage to themselves and whatever pissant cause they claim to stand for.


They did it to themselves.

Others did it for them
http://news.berkeley.edu/2017/02/01/yia ... -canceled/

The violence was instigated by a group of about 150 masked agitators who came onto campus and interrupted an otherwise non-violent protest.

Milo has a right to his free speech to spout his bullshit.

The protesters have THEIR right to free speech to protest and oppose what he has to say, and finding in unacceptable to them to hear it. Free speech doesn't give you a free pass of the consequences, like being a racist asshole under a company or Twitter banning you because of your hate speech. They're companies, and you're representing them, and if they don't want their company being used to spread that...then bye, they can get rid of you because they're expressing their right to free speech. I would say it also applies for them to shut him down for spouting it.

That said, I do not approve of shutting it down violently, nor shooting god damn fireworks at the university or whatever the hell they did together.

But Milo is also a troll, and is pretty much deliberately causing shit like this for attention. And it works, because that's now 3 of his events that have been shut down due to anti fascist protests and such. Though I think the first one was simply shut down, the 2nd one, one of his supporters shot someone (Of course it being turned into the supporter "protecting himself" but when people assumed it was a protester, they were "violent", because hypocrisy), and this one just...looked like a war on the university.

Alvecia wrote:

Dumb Ideologies wrote:The violent protesters shot their own side in the foot and should be ashamed of themselves for their own stupidity and making the arguments of their opponents seem more legitimate while simultaneous publicizing them.

Crypto-anarchistic morons.

Sometimes I don't wonder if there's just an apolitical org somewhere that goes to any and all protests just to start violence.

It's called Antifa.

Costa Fierro wrote:

Alvecia wrote:Sometimes I don't wonder if there's just an apolitical org somewhere that goes to any and all protests just to start violence.

It's called Antifa.

That's political, not apolitical.

Corrian wrote:
But Milo is also a troll, and is pretty much deliberately causing shit like this for attention. And it works, because that's now 3 of his events that have been shut down due to anti fascist protests and such. Though I think the first one was simply shut down, the 2nd one, one of his supporters shot someone (Of course it being turned into the supporter "protecting himself" but when people assumed it was a protester, they were "violent", because hypocrisy), and this one just...looked like a war on the university.

I'm going to admit, the left has really fucked up on this one, and played right into his hands. Hell, it's how we got into our current mess. Let assholes have their soapbox for an hour, and then go back to ignoring. It's going to be a lesson in not feeding the trolls, or at least it should be. In a sane world, people like Milo would fade into obscurity after they got done ranting on the street corner. By engaging them, or even worse by fighting them, you are in effect legitimizing their shit. Don't legitimize their shit, people.

Uiiop wrote:

Hexgard wrote:
Might be because the protests lately haven't been all too peaceful?



There isn't anything particullary hateful towards gays there, after all, half of it is praise on how gay men are great for society. It is rather a criticism on the gay community in his own right.

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/05 ... and-a-dad/ I got it from the article.
Also i noticed to didn't see the links i gave you.

Again, we might reading it in different ways, but it is not homophobic per se. The article does make sense in several points, whist on others it is just his opinion. Besides, there is no statement there that insists that gay couples are horrible parrents, that they shouldn't have a right to have kids and so on.

Maybe you should read the article again?

Alvecia wrote:

Costa Fierro wrote:
It's called Antifa.

That's political, not apolitical.

Potato, potato.

Costa Fierro wrote:

Alvecia wrote:That's political, not apolitical.

Potato, potato.

More like black, white.
One is literally the opposite of the other.

Alvecia wrote:

Dumb Ideologies wrote:The violent protesters shot their own side in the foot and should be ashamed of themselves for their own stupidity and making the arguments of their opponents seem more legitimate while simultaneous publicizing them.

Crypto-anarchistic morons.

Sometimes I don't wonder if there's just an apolitical org somewhere that goes to any and all protests just to start violence.

There is most definitely a small section who go to protests who believe that causing as much criminal damage and chaos as possible is some noble act against authority and "the system". Not apolitical, very radical in their politics in fact, but less concerned with the actual issue at hand at the protests they visit, and with very little understanding about how they harm the side who they claim to represent because nuance goes out the window when you get that radical.

Dumb Ideologies wrote:

Alvecia wrote:Sometimes I don't wonder if there's just an apolitical org somewhere that goes to any and all protests just to start violence.

There is most definitely a small section who go to protests who believe that causing as much criminal damage and chaos as possible is some noble act against authority and "the system". Not apolitical, very radical in their politics in fact, but less concerned with the actual issue at hand at the protests they visit, and with very little understanding about how they harm the side who they claim to represent because nuance goes out the window when you get that radical.

Yeah. I imagine that's very likely the case.

Hexgard wrote:

Uiiop wrote:http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/05 ... and-a-dad/ I got it from the article.
Also i noticed to didn't see the links i gave you.

Again, we might reading it in different ways, but it is not homophobic per se. The article does make sense in several points, whist on others it is just his opinion. Besides, there is no statement there that insists that gay couples are horrible parrents, that they shouldn't have a right to have kids and so on.

Maybe you should read the article again?

The context is "The problem when kids have two moms or two dads".
If that's not a statement meaning at least on average they're horrible i don't know what is.
He actually said to bully people into having heterosexual marriages. That's at least phobic

Alvecia wrote:

Dumb Ideologies wrote:
There is most definitely a small section who go to protests who believe that causing as much criminal damage and chaos as possible is some noble act against authority and "the system". Not apolitical, very radical in their politics in fact, but less concerned with the actual issue at hand at the protests they visit, and with very little understanding about how they harm the side who they claim to represent because nuance goes out the window when you get that radical.

Yeah. I imagine that's very likely the case.

Often it's "antifa" or some other "black bloc" numpties.

Hexgard wrote:

Philjia wrote:
Apart from his hatred of gay people.

You do get that he is openly gay, right? Do go on and fetch proof of him, a gay man, being hateful to gay people.

There is this thing called self-hate. Many anti gay Republican politicians end up getting caught in homosexual acts.

Edit: Or you can just be an asshole troll, like Milo.

Alvecia wrote:

Costa Fierro wrote:
Potato, potato.

More like black, white.
One is literally the opposite of the other.

Antifa may be a political name but from what we can gleam from their actions, they seem to be a group of people hellbent on committing as much public vandalism as possible, or at the very least creating some sort of violent disturbance. As DI said, they can have such extreme views that their actions may not appear to be politically motivated at all but rather as a symbolic act of rebellion.

I am also not aware of any coherent or agreed upon political agenda created by Antifa, aside from being against Nazis or "fascism".

Costa Fierro wrote:

Alvecia wrote:More like black, white.
One is literally the opposite of the other.

Antifa may be a political name but from what we can gleam from their actions, they seem to be a group of people hellbent on committing as much public vandalism as possible, or at the very least creating some sort of violent disturbance. As DI said, they can have such extreme views that their actions may not appear to be politically motivated at all but rather as a symbolic act of rebellion.

I am also not aware of any coherent or agreed upon political agenda created by Antifa, aside from being against Nazis or "fascism".

I dunno. Even just "rebelling against the system" seem like an inherently political stance of anti-government.

Hirota wrote:

Vassenor wrote:Why are people only ever concerned with the right of individuals to preach hate? Is the protest not itself an example of people exercising their own freedom of speech?

As long as it stays in the realm of protest, sure. But when that protest turns into an excuse to assault then there is a problem.

Even the person in the video was praising the peaceful ones.

...Then get's attacked by an asshole one.

Alvecia wrote:

Dumb Ideologies wrote:The violent protesters shot their own side in the foot and should be ashamed of themselves for their own stupidity and making the arguments of their opponents seem more legitimate while simultaneous publicizing them.

Crypto-anarchistic morons.

Sometimes I don't wonder if there's just an apolitical org somewhere that goes to any and all protests just to start violence.

Antifa and anarchists. They probably have their own online forums.

A Milo supporter shot someone didn't they? After he attended a "speech" at their uni? Yeah, no, this is not a free speech issue

Alvecia wrote:

Costa Fierro wrote:
Antifa may be a political name but from what we can gleam from their actions, they seem to be a group of people hellbent on committing as much public vandalism as possible, or at the very least creating some sort of violent disturbance. As DI said, they can have such extreme views that their actions may not appear to be politically motivated at all but rather as a symbolic act of rebellion.

I am also not aware of any coherent or agreed upon political agenda created by Antifa, aside from being against Nazis or "fascism".

I dunno. Even just "rebelling against the system" seem like an inherently political stance of anti-government.

I could go into a supermarket and make a bonfire out of teddy bears and chocolates and claim to be rebelling against the concept of Valentine's Day. Does that make it a political stance?

Hexgard wrote:Might be because the protests lately haven't been all too peaceful?.

Ignoring the fact the all peaceful with not one arrest Women's March that was also the largest protest in US history at the same time, of course.

Costa Fierro wrote:

Alvecia wrote:I dunno. Even just "rebelling against the system" seem like an inherently political stance of anti-government.

I could go into a supermarket and make a bonfire out of teddy bears and chocolates and claim to be rebelling against the concept of Valentine's Day. Does that make it a political stance?

I'd join you in this rebellion of Valentine's Day!

(I joke)

Vassenor wrote:I do also have to wonder. If this was an Islamist preaching hate against America, would everyone still be defending their right to free speech so slavishly?

Yes

Maybe not as "slavishly", but I'd hope the vast majority of Americans would still support their right to speak

Another question would be would the Left protest them on this scale?

The Portland Territory wrote:

Vassenor wrote:I do also have to wonder. If this was an Islamist preaching hate against America, would everyone still be defending their right to free speech so slavishly?

Yes

Maybe not as "slavishly", but I'd hope the vast majority of Americans would still support their right to speak

Another question would be would the Left protest them on this scale?

If he said that all Americans should be shamed into converting and insulted a student for that belief? Yeah i guess they would

Corrian wrote:

Costa Fierro wrote:
I could go into a supermarket and make a bonfire out of teddy bears and chocolates and claim to be rebelling against the concept of Valentine's Day. Does that make it a political stance?

I'd join you in this rebellion of Valentine's Day!

(I joke)

No! We shall make it a global movement! Let's call it Antiva!

Val Halla wrote:A Milo supporter shot someone didn't they? After he attended a "speech" at their uni? Yeah, no, this is not a free speech issue

Trump supporter who was attending a public speech in Seattle.

Corrian wrote:

Hexgard wrote:Might be because the protests lately haven't been all too peaceful?.

Ignoring the fact the all peaceful with not one arrest Women's March that was also the largest protest in US history at the same time, of course.

In what kind of cave do you live?
I literally see, time and again, people being beaten bloody by anti-Trump rioters, or otherwise phyiscially molested. Not to forget the burning of property and so on.