To anyone who actually thinks this is a good idea, read the windows.
(Picture taken from https://libcom.org/gallery/battle-cable-street-1936-photo-gallery, thanks @wrecksdart)
12 Likes
I’d never seen that before…thanks!
2 Likes
But it’s all just jokes, amirite? Fighting back against dehumanizing jokers make you the bully! /s
7 Likes
It’s not my fault that the free will of others is such a threat to their fragile worldviews.
8 Likes
I am probably stating myself very badly and I’ve probably overstepped the mark. I would object to the word “justified”. My argument, for what it’s worth is that the principal weapon of the Right is actually violence or the threat of violence, and that it often works. For instance, since the murder of Jo Cox by Mair in the UK, Labour MPs have been very unwilling to take a stand against leaving the EU, and one in six of women MPs asked recently said that, knowing what they know now, they would not have stood for Parliament.
I don’t think that liberalism is a workable answer to this. I would like it to be; I don’t like violence, in fact I personally avoid it. I don’t want it to be the answer. But it seems to me that so far the only thing that has stopped right wing abuse of power in the past has been violence directed against it. I am willing to be convinced that I’m wrong.
12 Likes
I know! It’s like a bunch of loveable scamps can’t even follow tradition and cast entire other groups of people as subhuman anymore and expect that everyone will go gamely along with it! /s
12 Likes
What ever happened to just a little horseplay and implicit threat of bodily harm between people who don’t know one another? This country sure has gone downhill /s
9 Likes
Hush, hush, apparently that horseplay puts people off from your message!
6 Likes
Anyone who thinks this wasn’t exactly the tactic they were going for is fooling themselves. This was the beginning of a coordinated campaign against sanctuary campuses. The “campaign” isn’t in the speeches. The campaign is the trolling. The campaign is footage of “masked terrorists pepper-spraying innocents.” The campaign is spinning this as “Free speech is dead on liberal campuses.”
The right hates the liberal thought on college campuses. They hate that federal funding goes to public universities. Berkeley is a prestigious public university in a hotbed of liberal thought and liberal money. It was the first day of Black history month. His speech was held in the MLK building. This was a trap.
Before the sun had even risen on the west coast, just after the helicopters had stopped circling, Trump posted this tweet.
Every schoolyard bully knows that if you taunt the other guy long enough that he socks you, he’ll take the fall.
Trolling (as any gamergirl who tried to warn the world knows) isn’t just an annoying, bratty game. It’s a counter-protest tactic: poke them til THEY start the riot you wish you could start.
Like the bully and his victim, both sides know it’s not fair, but rules are rules. The violence is outlawed; the trolling isn’t.
21 Likes
First sentence, [citation needed].
But yes, I do think the desire to keep guns for anything other than pest control or farming is very, very icky.
3 Likes
It wouldn’t surprise me, as there were flag waiving anarchists at the Trump Inauguration, and some people were mistaknig them for “regular” protestors.
It certainly is annoying when your cause is co-opted by others and gets your message completely drowned out. See Occupy Wallstreet.
4 Likes
I’m totally convinced now that how I conduct myself will totally inspire feelings of defeat in third parties. It’s so obvious to me. I have received an education here today /s
1 Like
Seeing a lot of ‘just be apathetic’ posts, too many to answer. In the last decade, has ‘don’t feed the trolls’ worked?
I’ve had a trans friend die to suicide because of people like Milo. If I was in the same room as him, the interaction STARTS with me spitting in his face. The fact so many people think not making eye contact and waiting for him to move along is the answer is really disturbing to me. Forget your devotion to not doing what will ‘look bad’ to the public. Do what is RIGHT.
14 Likes
Possibly insurrectionary anarchists, possibly nihilists.
Either way, most of the anarchists I know find them annoying, and it’s not like they are pacifists.
1 Like
Well, now that we have seen each other," said the unicorn, "if you’ll believe in me, I’ll believe in you.”
2 Likes
In fact, all the advice I’m giving to other people is stuff I’m following through with myself: for one, I fully intend not to initiate political violence, even against people who use really mean words at me! For another, I am actively finding peaceful, effective ways to engage in politics (I want to do more direct action than protest, as protest seems to be largely symbolic at this point). For a third, I am actively training in combat sports and intend to do some firearms training by the end of the year.
You’re making this personal, but I’d really prefer to talk about the issues if you don’t mind.
Feel free to make an actual argument for your position any time. (Note that I immediately followed my Carroll quote with an argument for my position.)
1 Like
Did you go for that walk? If not then I suggest you’re giving credit where not due, you.
“In a Wonderland they lie, Dreaming as the days go by, Dreaming as the summers die:
Ever drifting down the stream- Lingering in the golden gleam- Life, what is it but a dream?”
Regarding the proper use of violence:
The reason we have things like laws and social norms is to give people a way to settle grievances themselves other than violence. If laws and social norms protect the right of racists to be racist but don’t protect the right of racialized groups to enter the country, then violence is going to result because of a failure of the law to do its job.
The reason we can say “Violence is never acceptable” is because we built Violence-Is-Never-Acceptable. We built it pretty damn recently. 200 years ago your sitting vice president legally killed one of your founding fathers in a fucking duel. If we don’t maintain the infrastructure of Violence-Is-Never-Acceptable then it’s going to break.
Milo is smug on purpose with the intention of enraging people. Sometimes when you behave that way people become violent.
Regarding whether we are playing into Milo’s hands:
Fuck him. He can have his money and his smug smiles. Better for people who oppose him to know that they aren’t alone. If you spend your life worrying about Milo instead of worrying about yourself then I’d say that’s playing into his hands.
Regarding free speech:
Holding free speech above everything else is flat out stupid-as-fuck. Everybody knows that. There are plenty of things you could be arrested for saying even in America. If I said, “I’d happily pay $10,000 to anyone who killed Milo” that would be downright illegal. We’re haggling over degree.
When you say we need to protect the right of racists to say racist things because inciting people to hate based on race isn’t bad enough that we have to do something about it, realize that is what you are saying: it isn’t bad enough. There’s no absolute to appeal to. You are drawing a spectrum:
You are putting the dots in these places. You are not making an appeal to an inviolable principle.
And by putting the dots in those places, you are stating an opinion that the amount of harm done by inciting hate isn’t enough that we ought to make it illegal. That’s based on a guess about what that amount of harm is (unless you want to cite some science?). If that’s your guess, then my guess is that you could work on your empathy, and maybe on your understanding of cause and effect.
Why Milo’s speech should be illegal
He specifically cultivated an audience who would criminally harass people at his behest. Saying he didn’t criminally harass Leslie Jones (for example, there are lots of other examples) is like saying the mob boss didn’t order that hit, he just ordered a pizza. That was a specific code phrase. The speaker said it with the intention that it would be interpreted the way it was as a fact interpreted by the people who then engaged in criminal behaviour (e.g., death and rape threats). While that may be a hard case to make in court because it rests on proving his intent, it’s pretty damn obvious what happened. Allowing him to speak at your event is giving him a platform to order that pizza, and is borderline abetting.
36 Likes
I don’t really understand what you’re saying at this point. You were the one who advised me to go for a walk first…doesn’t that mean by your own reasoning you are the one who is arrogant and in the wrong?
I repeat, though, I’d really prefer to discuss the issues at hand rather than bicker with you at a personal level.
I had just gone for a walk, and I’m not arrogating anything from you
and, I am not arguing right and wrong - that’s also you.
Please, take your strawmen away.
