Your post is much, much better than any of mine today and I thank you for it.
He is doing, btw, exactly what Mosley did using coded phrases. While Mosley claimed not to be inciting violence, his followers were marching through London chanting “The yds, the yds, we’ve got to get rid of the y*ds.”
There’s a lot of scope for disagreement here, but the left at this point is censorious to the point of giving up on the ideal of free speech altogether. I’m not willing to let that go, in part because it’s an important component of what you described as “Violence-Is-Never-Acceptable”. Yes, we built it, and an important part of its structure is “it’s not OK to respond to mean words with violence”.
Then let him be the bad guy. When you respond by engaging in physical violence, you become the bad guy.
I agree that racism is bad and that Yiannopolous is a terrible person, but I think your tactics are terrible and bound to hamstring the left while empowering the right.
So… If they tell the big lie “hate speech IS free speech” and that isn’t refuted Milo wins and should win. Do I have this right?
I think I’ve wandered into the bizzaro version of Orwel!
OK, well I’m not going for a walk, but I’m also not especially emotional or upset so i don’t feel a need. I really appreciate your concern, though, and I hope you feel a little better soon.
But you advised that I take my advice, and
Right or wrong is beside the point. Authentic is never beside the point. Thank you for sharing your fascinating worldview, I submit that someday it will change into one less closed off from contrary evidence
Also, [quote=“wysinwyg, post:131, topic:94219”]
I hope you feel a little better soon.
[/quote]
I hope you realize that how I feel isn’t any of your business, nor is it something appropriate to use converastionally to shame someone into silence. Surely not from someone so sensitive to personal comments and such a paragon of virtue as yourself.
I’m not going to bother further, since you’re a fan of _argumentum ad dictionarium: Arrogate Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster
Thanks. I usually try to credit them when I use one of the photos there, but forgot this time.
I don’t have any tactics or even advocate any tactics. I’m saying there are some choices to make. If we want a society where violence is never acceptable, then we need laws capable of dealing with people who intentionally incite violence (or threats of violence if we want to differentiate). If we choose not to have those laws, then the amount of harm caused by people doing this will eventually incite Old West style justice.
Choosing not to be violent is driving on the violence-is-never-acceptable road, it’s not filling the pot holes.
Some days I am eager to try to do that roadwork, some days I just don’t care what course society sets for itself. Today is the latter.
And, to state the bloody obvious, the rule of law is breaking down.
What contrary evidence are you talking about?
Can you provide evidence that I was sensitive to personal comments or claimed to be a paragon of virtue?
As I already pointed out, I did not make an “argumentum ad dictionarium”. I pointed out your usage of a word is non-standard, then conceded to using it for the sake of argument, then pointed out why you’re wrong even given that concession.
A: Where is Jenkins today?
B: We fired him.
A: What? Why??
B: He kept screaming racial epithets and taping pictures of swastikas all over the break room.
A: You freedom-hating monster
Just imagine I said something, and go ahead with the demeaning reply. It’ll save a lot of my time.
Who invited Yiannopolous to speak at Berkeley? Whoever it was knew there’d be a shit storm. Follow the money!
Yeah, no kidding. We know how to do better than Old West Justice, but if we don’t actually do it, then mobs putting people down based on less-than-perfect evidence is what we can expect.
and the middle ground on this is, as with every other thing I might discuss, is your position.
well, if you’re not sensitive to something you can’t see it in others, can you, as such:
I submit that you’re projecting. You see it exactly because its you. I’m just standing here pointing out inconsistencies. Your assumption that I oppose you isn’t my project.
I know a shitweasel, don’t disparage the good name of shitweasels.
It’s an honest question. I really have no idea what you meant by “contrary evidence”. What evidence? Contrary to what?
I actually think I’ve been fairly polite and civil through the whole conversation (especially compared to those who are rebutting me), and humbly invite you to point out where I have, for example, engaged in name-calling or personal attacks.
Not sure if it was posted here earlier, but — Trump is now threatening to pull federal funds from UC Berkeley for cancelling the event, calling Milo an “innocent person with a different point of view” and claiming that they “practice violence” on Milo, whatever that means.
