Illiberal Left Shuts Down Free Speech with Violence (Again)
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
02-02-2017, 03:45 PM
RE: Illiberal Left Shuts Down Free Speech with Violence (Again)
(02-02-2017 03:37 PM)BryanS Wrote:  
(02-02-2017 03:33 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  As has already been discussed (which you seem to have skipped), freedom of speech does not guarantee you freedom from repercussions.

You are free to speak your mind, and people are free to protest it. Even if a person decides to do so violently, it doesn't violate your freedom of speech even if they broke the law by doing you harm. Your freedom of speech is ONLY violated by the government.

That point is not lost on me, but it almost seems like you are saying anyone can do anything they please. But those consequences should be legal consequences, not unlawful actions. I am not arguing for a right to be heard. I am arguing for a right to speech. It is the left who have at times demanded a right to be heard when they protest in a way that interferes with others rights (like blocking traffic and interfering with others' daily lives).

But his right to free speech wasn't violated, that only happens when the government decides what you can and can't say.

Once again, responding to Milo and his ilk with violence is a stupid move and is deplorable. What is being rejected is the notion that this was a violent act of the "illiberal left" as DumbassLight put it.

I certainly am not crying any rivers for Milo that he ended up not speaking, but he didn't end up in jail for what he was going to say so his right to free speech was not violated. The fact that people stood up and protested him, is encouraging. The fact that a minority of people decided to use it as an opportunity to riot and incite violence is sad and not entirely unexpected. Large groups of people, some of which are fueled by the hatred of bigots like Milo, that are emotionally charged do seem prone to rioting.

But was this an "illiberal left" riot? I don't know what that is other than a half-cocked insult from DL. Was it a riot of the left? Who knows, but there is no evidence to show that this was from anyone on the left end of the spectrum. It seems at least as equally likely that assholes were drawn to the protest and seized the opportunity to turn it violent for whatever reason (if they even had a reason)

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheBeardedDude's post
02-02-2017, 03:45 PM
RE: Illiberal Left Shuts Down Free Speech with Violence (Again)
(02-02-2017 03:40 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  
(02-02-2017 03:37 PM)BryanS Wrote:  That point is not lost on me, but it almost seems like you are saying anyone can do anything they please. But those consequences should be legal consequences, not unlawful actions. I am not arguing for a right to be heard. I am arguing for a right to speech. It is the left who have at times demanded a right to be heard when they protest in a way that interferes with others rights (like blocking traffic and interfering with others' daily lives).

If a protest isn't inconvenient on some level, it's not much of a protest. Convenient protests are much easier to ignore.

As long as the actions are legal, protests and counter-demonstrations are A-OK. But blocking access to public services or shutting down a major transportation artery of a city in an unplanned way infringes on the public's rights.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-02-2017, 03:51 PM
RE: Illiberal Left Shuts Down Free Speech with Violence (Again)
(02-02-2017 03:45 PM)BryanS Wrote:  
(02-02-2017 03:40 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  If a protest isn't inconvenient on some level, it's not much of a protest. Convenient protests are much easier to ignore.

As long as the actions are legal, protests and counter-demonstrations are A-OK. But blocking access to public services or shutting down a major transportation artery of a city in an unplanned way infringes on the public's rights.

And the people who participate do so as a form of civil disobedience, with all of the risk that implies. Remember too that at one time it was illegal for colored folk to sit at the dinner counter or at the front of the bus, but they did so anyways as a form of protest, and they too were arrested for it. Indeed, being arrested for civil disobedience is something of a proud American tradition, no?

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like EvolutionKills's post
02-02-2017, 03:55 PM
RE: Illiberal Left Shuts Down Free Speech with Violence (Again)
(02-02-2017 03:39 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(02-02-2017 10:33 AM)yakherder Wrote:  I'm not sure why it's relevant, but on Dec. 8th we only declared war on Japan. Germany declared war on us on the 11th. We on them a few hours later.

And for the record, even China was taking in Jewish refugees when we were still turning them down. And initially we didn't feel the urge to go to war until it was clear that our self interests were at stake. Our collective sympathy towards others being wronged didn't evolve until later.

We should have a funny as fuck button next to the like button. ... Consider ... Actually maybe we should have a dude stop it you're killing me button, might prevent some of the bickering here much as I enjoy watching it in some sorta perverse way.

We could also use the "Michael Jackson eating popcorn" button.

'Murican Canadian
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like yakherder's post
02-02-2017, 03:58 PM
RE: Illiberal Left Shuts Down Free Speech with Violence (Again)
(02-02-2017 03:55 PM)yakherder Wrote:  
(02-02-2017 03:39 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  We should have a funny as fuck button next to the like button. ... Consider ... Actually maybe we should have a dude stop it you're killing me button, might prevent some of the bickering here much as I enjoy watching it in some sorta perverse way.

We could also use the "Michael Jackson eating popcorn" button.

I vote we replace the demon with an emoji with a bad combover Laugh out load

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheBeardedDude's post
02-02-2017, 04:00 PM
RE: Illiberal Left Shuts Down Free Speech with Violence (Again)
(02-02-2017 03:45 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(02-02-2017 03:37 PM)BryanS Wrote:  That point is not lost on me, but it almost seems like you are saying anyone can do anything they please. But those consequences should be legal consequences, not unlawful actions. I am not arguing for a right to be heard. I am arguing for a right to speech. It is the left who have at times demanded a right to be heard when they protest in a way that interferes with others rights (like blocking traffic and interfering with others' daily lives).

But his right to free speech wasn't violated, that only happens when the government decides what you can and can't say.

That's just a fatuous, nonsensical argument. The government is charged with protecting the public, and if a private entity breaks the law in order to stop your ability to exercise that right, that private entity has violated your rights (in this case the right to free speech).

The 15th amendment guarantees the right of African Americans to vote--if private citizens organized violent protests in front of a polling place in order to intimidate potential voters in predominantly minority neighborhoods, those private citizens would be infringing on the right to vote. It would be ridiculous to say otherwise.

You put speech in a special category that precludes any actor other than the government from being able to infringe on it.


Quote:Once again, responding to Milo and his ilk with violence is a stupid move and is deplorable. What is being rejected is the notion that this was a violent act of the "illiberal left" as DumbassLight put it.

I certainly am not crying any rivers for Milo that he ended up not speaking, but he didn't end up in jail for what he was going to say so his right to free speech was not violated. The fact that people stood up and protested him, is encouraging. The fact that a minority of people decided to use it as an opportunity to riot and incite violence is sad and not entirely unexpected. Large groups of people, some of which are fueled by the hatred of bigots like Milo, that are emotionally charged do seem prone to rioting.

But was this an "illiberal left" riot? I don't know what that is other than a half-cocked insult from DL. Was it a riot of the left? Who knows, but there is no evidence to show that this was from anyone on the left end of the spectrum. It seems at least as equally likely that assholes were drawn to the protest and seized the opportunity to turn it violent for whatever reason (if they even had a reason)

Would it be better to say it was the "liberal left"? That would only be accurate if liberals have the position that violent actions are OK if it means shutting down speech they don't like. Posters put up by the organizers (presumably the peaceful ones) argued for "Shutting down" Milo's speech. That is what ended up happening.



note:edited to update the correct amendment to 15th Smile
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes BryanS's post
02-02-2017, 04:01 PM
RE: Illiberal Left Shuts Down Free Speech with Violence (Again)
(02-02-2017 03:55 PM)yakherder Wrote:  
(02-02-2017 03:39 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  We should have a funny as fuck button next to the like button. ... Consider ... Actually maybe we should have a dude stop it you're killing me button, might prevent some of the bickering here much as I enjoy watching it in some sorta perverse way.

We could also use the "Michael Jackson eating popcorn" button.

If we are adding any new buttons, first priority is a 'Receive Bacon' button!

[Image: push_button_bacon_full.jpg]

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like EvolutionKills's post
02-02-2017, 04:01 PM (This post was last modified: 02-02-2017 05:00 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Illiberal Left Shuts Down Free Speech with Violence (Again)
(02-02-2017 10:47 AM)Dark Light Wrote:  Unless you describe yourself as 'illiberal left' it's not an insult to you.

Yeah, I'm still trying to parse this bit. So I had to google illiberable first so thanks for that (will you be my word chum? no seriously will you be my word chum?) Thumbsup, does it mean not liberal like illiterate mean not literate?

"opposed to liberal principles; restricting freedom of thought or behavior,intolerant, narrow-minded, unenlightened, conservative, reactionary" - (ref. someplace on the internet I can't be bothered to link)

So more like anti-liberal, got it. So in the US "illiberal left" would be anti-liberal Democrats. Okay, fair enough. I'm sure I could find plenty of those if I was curious enough. But it could also mean "intolerant Democrats" or "narrow-minded Democrats" or "unenlightened Democrats" or, and this one is my favorite, "conservative Democrats". Most I think would consider those to be intended as insults although it's not clear in the last case who it's directed towards.



illiberable, illiverable, illiberabl - sorry, it's how I remember words.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like GirlyMan's post
02-02-2017, 04:05 PM
RE: Illiberal Left Shuts Down Free Speech with Violence (Again)
(02-02-2017 04:00 PM)BryanS Wrote:  
(02-02-2017 03:45 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  But his right to free speech wasn't violated, that only happens when the government decides what you can and can't say.

That's just a fatuous, nonsensical argument. The government is charged with protecting the public, and if a private entity breaks the law in order to stop your ability to exercise that right, that private entity has violated your rights (in this case the right to free speech).

The 15th amendment guarantees the right of African Americans to vote--if private citizens organized violent protests in front of a polling place in order to intimidate potential voters in predominantly minority neighborhoods, those private citizens would be infringing on the right to vote. It would be ridiculous to say otherwise.

You put speech in a special category that precludes any actor other than the government from being able to infringe on it.


Quote:Once again, responding to Milo and his ilk with violence is a stupid move and is deplorable. What is being rejected is the notion that this was a violent act of the "illiberal left" as DumbassLight put it.

I certainly am not crying any rivers for Milo that he ended up not speaking, but he didn't end up in jail for what he was going to say so his right to free speech was not violated. The fact that people stood up and protested him, is encouraging. The fact that a minority of people decided to use it as an opportunity to riot and incite violence is sad and not entirely unexpected. Large groups of people, some of which are fueled by the hatred of bigots like Milo, that are emotionally charged do seem prone to rioting.

But was this an "illiberal left" riot? I don't know what that is other than a half-cocked insult from DL. Was it a riot of the left? Who knows, but there is no evidence to show that this was from anyone on the left end of the spectrum. It seems at least as equally likely that assholes were drawn to the protest and seized the opportunity to turn it violent for whatever reason (if they even had a reason)

Would it be better to say it was the "liberal left"? That would only be accurate if liberals have the position that violent actions are OK if it means shutting down speech they don't like. Posters put up by the organizers (presumably the peaceful ones) argued for "Shutting down" Milo's speech. That is what ended up happening.



note:edited to update the correct amendment to 15th Smile

"The government is charged with protecting the public, and if a private entity breaks the law in order to stop your ability to exercise that right, that private entity has violated your rights (in this case the right to free speech). "

You need to rethink what you think you are saying here. This means that no company, or entity, or forum, or whatever, can legally have a code of conduct or its own internal rules. So you think it is illegal for a company to fire someone for saying racial slurs around the office?

(Hint: free speech is a special circumstance)

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheBeardedDude's post
02-02-2017, 04:06 PM (This post was last modified: 02-02-2017 04:46 PM by EvolutionKills.)
RE: Illiberal Left Shuts Down Free Speech with Violence (Again)
(02-02-2017 04:00 PM)BryanS Wrote:  
(02-02-2017 03:45 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  But his right to free speech wasn't violated, that only happens when the government decides what you can and can't say.

That's just a fatuous, nonsensical argument. The government is charged with protecting the public, and if a private entity breaks the law in order to stop your ability to exercise that right, that private entity has violated your rights (in this case the right to free speech).

The 15th amendment guarantees the right of African Americans to vote--if private citizens organized violent protests in front of a polling place in order to intimidate potential voters in predominantly minority neighborhoods, those private citizens would be infringing on the right to vote. It would be ridiculous to say otherwise.

You put speech in a special category that precludes any actor other than the government from being able to infringe on it.


Quote:Once again, responding to Milo and his ilk with violence is a stupid move and is deplorable. What is being rejected is the notion that this was a violent act of the "illiberal left" as DumbassLight put it.

I certainly am not crying any rivers for Milo that he ended up not speaking, but he didn't end up in jail for what he was going to say so his right to free speech was not violated. The fact that people stood up and protested him, is encouraging. The fact that a minority of people decided to use it as an opportunity to riot and incite violence is sad and not entirely unexpected. Large groups of people, some of which are fueled by the hatred of bigots like Milo, that are emotionally charged do seem prone to rioting.

But was this an "illiberal left" riot? I don't know what that is other than a half-cocked insult from DL. Was it a riot of the left? Who knows, but there is no evidence to show that this was from anyone on the left end of the spectrum. It seems at least as equally likely that assholes were drawn to the protest and seized the opportunity to turn it violent for whatever reason (if they even had a reason)

Would it be better to say it was the "liberal left"? That would only be accurate if liberals have the position that violent actions are OK if it means shutting down speech they don't like. Posters put up by the organizers (presumably the peaceful ones) argued for "Shutting down" Milo's speech. That is what ended up happening.



note:edited to update the correct amendment to 15th Smile


Because there is a difference between voting in a government election, and voting for the head of your neighborhood housing association. Someone who interferes with your ability to vote for President violates your constitutional rights, someone who interferes with your ability to vote for the head of the Neighborhood Association is not violating your constitutional rights. The Constitution grants you a right to speech (mostly) free from government interference, but not free from all interference, nor free from consequences.

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like EvolutionKills's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: