Caporegime
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 28,928
Thought this was an interesting article relating to this topic
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-47147778
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-47147778
Milo/UC Berkley protestors stop 'hate speech' by using violence and hate...
- Thread starter dowie
- Start date
So you could say that the right-wing is nobely trying to stop the spread of evil left-wing hate speech while the left is trying to shutdown legitimate discourse.
Thank god common sense has prevailed in the majority of cases!
/Tounge-in-cheek
It's probably linguistic gymnastics to be honest, most of the people the crazy Antifa/far left try to shut down as being "right-wing" have many what would be called left-wing views, classical left-wing/liberal that is, not the modern far left that actually behaves like Nazi's while accusing everyone else of being one. The problem is you only have to have one opinion that those on the left take exception to (anything outside of their dogma) and you get cast as a "right-wing" hate figure.
Lets compare classical liberalism to the brand of modern "Liberalism(TM)":
Classical liberalism
Individual freedom
Free speech
Fought against corporate abuse/power
Free thinkers
Don't use violence
Tolerant to differences of opinion
Private property
Free market capitalism
Rule of law
Modern Liberalism(TM)
Conformity
Hate speech (Free speech is out of the window)
Love corporations (mainstream media/social media giants who censor/propagandise about election meddling because they lost, support increasingly draconian corporate T&C's over law)
Dogmatic (just follow the narrative that is spoon fed to them by said corporations)
Have a violent enforcement arm called Antifa
Extremely hostile towards differences of opinion
Want to socialise everything
Want to destroy capitalism via climate change movements etc
Subvert the rule of law (believe in guilty until proven innocent, trying to abolish several amendments to the US constitution and the electoral college etc) (In the UK allowed mass grooming/rape gangs to prey on young girls)
"Right-wing"
Individual freedom
Free speech
Fight against corporate censorship/power typically aimed at them
Free thinkers (think for themselves basically)
Prefer to debate
Tolerant to differences of opinion
Private property
Free market capitalism
Rule of law
In reality, if anyone is "like Hitler/a Fascist/a Nazi" it's the left but because they support a few classically liberal movements like LGBT and pretend to care about immigrants they've somehow managed to invert everything and paint all of the right as white supremacists. It would be worthy of admiration the way they've done it if it wasn't so terrifying. It's worth noting that both Hitler and Mussolini were Socialists earlier in life, Fascism is just an off-shoot of it. Fascism has far more in common with Socialism than Westernism but most on the left think that Fascism is just marked by nationalism/racism etc, it was a system of government with huge top down control with one of the few exceptions compared to Socialism that they allowed private business as long as they served the government. Jews were likely persecuted because they were for the most part successful capitalists and wanted nothing to do with the Nazi party. Is it just a coincidence that today's left are largely anti-semitic?
Lets compare classical liberalism to the brand of modern "Liberalism(TM)":
Classical liberalism
Individual freedom
Free speech
Fought against corporate abuse/power
Free thinkers
Don't use violence
Tolerant to differences of opinion
Private property
Free market capitalism
Rule of law
Modern Liberalism(TM)
Conformity
Hate speech (Free speech is out of the window)
Love corporations (mainstream media/social media giants who censor/propagandise about election meddling because they lost, support increasingly draconian corporate T&C's over law)
Dogmatic (just follow the narrative that is spoon fed to them by said corporations)
Have a violent enforcement arm called Antifa
Extremely hostile towards differences of opinion
Want to socialise everything
Want to destroy capitalism via climate change movements etc
Subvert the rule of law (believe in guilty until proven innocent, trying to abolish several amendments to the US constitution and the electoral college etc) (In the UK allowed mass grooming/rape gangs to prey on young girls)
"Right-wing"
Individual freedom
Free speech
Fight against corporate censorship/power typically aimed at them
Free thinkers (think for themselves basically)
Prefer to debate
Tolerant to differences of opinion
Private property
Free market capitalism
Rule of law
In reality, if anyone is "like Hitler/a Fascist/a Nazi" it's the left but because they support a few classically liberal movements like LGBT and pretend to care about immigrants they've somehow managed to invert everything and paint all of the right as white supremacists. It would be worthy of admiration the way they've done it if it wasn't so terrifying. It's worth noting that both Hitler and Mussolini were Socialists earlier in life, Fascism is just an off-shoot of it. Fascism has far more in common with Socialism than Westernism but most on the left think that Fascism is just marked by nationalism/racism etc, it was a system of government with huge top down control with one of the few exceptions compared to Socialism that they allowed private business as long as they served the government. Jews were likely persecuted because they were for the most part successful capitalists and wanted nothing to do with the Nazi party. Is it just a coincidence that today's left are largely anti-semitic?
Last edited:
I'd like to see evidence of that. Because I can go to YouTube right now an dig up dozens of videos of left-wingers shutting down debate and no-platforming, but yet to see a right-wing demonstration shutting down a left-wing speaker. I'm happy to be proved wrong if you can show me
Caporegime
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 28,928
I already posted a link to a BBC article that has another link inside of it with that information
https://www.thefire.org/research/disinvitation-database/#home/?view_2_per_page=1000&view_2_page=1
https://www.thefire.org/research/disinvitation-database/#home/?view_2_per_page=1000&view_2_page=1
That gives no information or evidence as to who was shutting down debates. As mmj_uk said, most left-wing speakers i've seen have been shut down by even futher left-wing groups. A good example is Germaine Greer, a feminist icon being shut down by Trans-activists.
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/politics/mps-back-students-who-tried-14464265
Caporegime
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 28,928
Did you click 'view'?
For instance: https://www.thefire.org/research/di...ationattemptdetails/5cb8ca666803a92ca4de3bd2/
For instance: https://www.thefire.org/research/di...ationattemptdetails/5cb8ca666803a92ca4de3bd2/
There are details but yeah it does seem that the vocal/disruptive protestors trying to shut stuff down would be from the left and that example is indeed left vs left.
The list does provide details but includes stuff like a petition being signed as a failed attempt to shut down a speaker, whereas this thread was about people using physical violence to attempt to achieve that aim.
If everyone just signed petitions and most of them failed because the reasons for wanting the speaker pulled were weak then this sort of stuff wouldn't really be newsworthy in the first place.
I guess the main exception re: trying to ban event's/speakers is perhaps the American right and anything to do with abortion being a potential trigger for them.
Associate
- Joined
- 2 Jan 2010
- Posts
- 2,307
You have a few valid points that get lost in your bias. You haven't got a chip on your shoulder, you've got a rock.
As for the whole "The left is anti-Semitic" nonsense, it doesn't take a genius to work out that this rhetoric is being peddled out so people ignore the right's Islamophobia.
antisemitism is actually one of the main cited reasons in the document for wanting to stop the left wing speakers they've listed
Associate
- Joined
- 9 Oct 2018
- Posts
- 1,304
People haven’t looked very hard if they cant find examples of people on the right not wanting free speech.
Look at the entire Kaepernick situation, uses his free speech to protest and gets death threats from right wingers telling him to stop.
Then you have people like Richard Spencer who are on camera admitting that the alt right don’t care one bit about free speech and use faux outrage over it to advance their agenda. Makes perfect sense given their infamous habit of mass reporting YouTube and Twitter accounts which spread a message they dislike.
Then there is the entire narrative of Trumps hardcore fan base calling for journalists of liberal papers to be locked up.
In Brazil this week Bolsenaro threatened to lock up Glen Greenwald for a critical article he printed.
There are hundreds more examples if you actually bother paying attention.
There may be a case that on American college campus’s the issue is more dominated by screechy left wing types but even then there have been research groups study the issue and come to the conclusion it’s a massively exaggerated problem, much like the comical overhyping of the SJW “epidemic”.
The rights number one grift at the moment is telling everyone that only they care about free speech, in truth only dangerously thick people actually believe this.
Look at the entire Kaepernick situation, uses his free speech to protest and gets death threats from right wingers telling him to stop.
Then you have people like Richard Spencer who are on camera admitting that the alt right don’t care one bit about free speech and use faux outrage over it to advance their agenda. Makes perfect sense given their infamous habit of mass reporting YouTube and Twitter accounts which spread a message they dislike.
Then there is the entire narrative of Trumps hardcore fan base calling for journalists of liberal papers to be locked up.
In Brazil this week Bolsenaro threatened to lock up Glen Greenwald for a critical article he printed.
There are hundreds more examples if you actually bother paying attention.
There may be a case that on American college campus’s the issue is more dominated by screechy left wing types but even then there have been research groups study the issue and come to the conclusion it’s a massively exaggerated problem, much like the comical overhyping of the SJW “epidemic”.
The rights number one grift at the moment is telling everyone that only they care about free speech, in truth only dangerously thick people actually believe this.
Last edited:
Caporegime
You know when traffic slows to a halt and you just know it's because there's been a serious accident and you shouldn't look, you shouldn't stop and stare, incredulous because this is all awful, but you do anyway and then welp, here we are.Why am I even in this thread
Caporegime
Could you explain how the right is islamophobic? Given that, you know, Islam is an oppressive doctrine and far right by its very nature?
Associate
- Joined
- 2 Jan 2010
- Posts
- 2,307
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...hreat-trump-johnson-hunt-yougov-a8992821.html
56% of polled Tory Members believed that Islam was a threat to the British way of life. Case closed.
Associate
- Joined
- 2 Jan 2010
- Posts
- 2,307
Every time there's a protest the right doesn't like, such as Kaepernick or the recent Climate Change protest where Mark Field restrained a protestor, they spout the same excuses... You're allowed your freedom of speech, just not anywhere public where people might be able to a really hear your completely wrong, left loony, opinion.
Caporegime
Um...a survey of fewer than 900 members of a specific group. The Tory party do not represent the right.
Also worth pointing out Islam has proven itself to be a threat, or rather some of its adherents have.
You're conflating rather different things here - getting angry at Kaepernick isn't the same as trying to stop someone from speaking at a university. IF Kaepernick were to go and speak at a university and people upset over the kneeling issue tried to get that speech banned then you'd have something comparable.
Trying to stop someone from speaking in front of a group of people who want to attend the event the speaker is booked for is rather different.
In fact the survey posted has conflated speaker events where the audience is there to see the speaker and others just want to silence them with broader events such as commencement addresses to the student body as a whole - where there is perhaps a more legitimate reason for wanting controversial speakers removed.
Caporegime
No, but you could say the dogma behind such things are a threat. Would mass gun ownership not threaten our way of life? I'd say it certainly would.
Did the threat of the IRA not change things? Definitely. Particularly for those in NI.
So is Islam a threat? In the same way your two attempts at counter examples are, yes!