Unfortunately, these protests turned violent a while back. Only two weeks ago, a Milo supporter shot a protester at a rally.
Milo/UC Berkley protestors stop 'hate speech' by using violence and hate...
- Thread starter dowie
- Start date
"Less well known is the paradox of tolerance: Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. — In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant."
-Karl Popper
tis interesting to see the bias in publications like the guardian and daily fail - always worth googling a story to read multiple sources - The guardian mentions the charges not being pursued but doesn't allude to the reason, googling it reveals that the shooter was attacked by protestors and initially tried to get away from the guy he ended up shooting
not that that would be acceptable by UK standards but in the US it seems to be legitimate self defence thus no charges
Man of Honour
Self defense, presumably. It's prudent to be armed when facing mobs of violent authoritarian bigots.
Man of Honour
Karl Popper's quote sums up why those of us who are tolerant shouldn't tolerate the "liberals", who are wildly illiberal and utterly intolerant. They're worse than the intolerant people Karl Popper refers to because not only are they intolerant, they're trying to corrupt and thus destroy the very idea of tolerance.
Strange for hurfdurf of all people to post that quote from Popper, since he's the sort of person it's directed against.
EDIT: I clicked on the quote button on hurfdurf's post, but due to a long-standing bug in these forums nothing was quoted.
Strange for hurfdurf of all people to post that quote from Popper, since he's the sort of person it's directed against.
EDIT: I clicked on the quote button on hurfdurf's post, but due to a long-standing bug in these forums nothing was quoted.
Man of Honour
Which explains why the person who was shot doesn't want to press charges. They wouldn't want a trial, which might draw some public attention to the truth. This way, they can portray themself (and by extension their ideology) as the saintly peace-lover. Perfect for propaganda purposes.
[FnG]magnolia;30465113 said:
Actually protection of free speech from violent consequence is exactly what freedom of speech means.
You can have consequence of having prople talk back to you or othet legal non violent means but freedom of seech means you cant be physically abused to stop you talking.
Appears some people are
Liberal != intolerant in the same way conservative != racist
I don't agree with anything Milo says, he still has as much right to say it as anyone else does, without violence against him. If he stands up and says that we should have less women in science, he is allowed to. Just like anyone who opposes him is allowed to say that we actually need more women in science and technology and challenge his views.
This is the problem at the moment, everyone who is on the right calls everyone to the left of them a *******/SJW/********* etc, and everyone who is on the left calls everyone to the right of them a facist/nazi/white nationalist.
Last edited:
Man of Honour
Cops should have used water cannon on the rent-a-mob agitators and that would have made a good news story. next demo please...
I don't agree with everything, in fact I don't agree with most of what he says. But to not agree with "anything" is taking a purposeful stance because some of the things he says are backed up with hard data that can only be interpreted one way. I admit most of it is interpretation and political, but not all of it.
People who reject the right wholesale because they don't like it when sometimes the are right (correct) are pushing an agenda that is not democratic and not helping. The harder people reject everything wholesale the harder the right will want to push it back in peoples faces because they know some of it is undeniable.
The left needs to pick it's battles better, call out the things that are not factually correct rather than call people names wholesale. The devil is in the detail...
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 29,415
Just look at these very forums for proof of that. I get called leftie and am more centralist myself.
Caporegime
Cops were actually given a stand-down order. There are people in authority who approve of and encourage this violence.
I'll admit I've not read every article he has written, mainly because the first two made me vomit in my mouth and thought it was best avoiding him in future. He may have written something I'd agree with, in the same light that a dog **** on the street might taste like strawberries
Soldato
I think applying any kind of Left/Right spectrum to them is incorrect, they are neither I think if they were a D&D character they would be classed as Chaotic Neutral
Soldato
Good news story?
Something along with lines of 'police host open air shower for soap dodging hippies? '
Soldato
The rise of facism has always tended to be a bit of a lefty thing.
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Sep 2005
- Posts
- 4,345
I don't buy that most of the rioters were actually students are Berkeley. If their goal was truly to quash Milo speaking reaching an audience, they have completely failed in that task.
For the record, I quite like Milo. Yes he says some outrageous things but this is because he understands how to gain a following. He asks probing questions, comes armed with stats, speaks calmly and clearly and is open to debate and discussion. I have more of an issue with people shouting him down as bigoted, racist etc. rather than having a counter point.
For the record, I quite like Milo. Yes he says some outrageous things but this is because he understands how to gain a following. He asks probing questions, comes armed with stats, speaks calmly and clearly and is open to debate and discussion. I have more of an issue with people shouting him down as bigoted, racist etc. rather than having a counter point.
Caporegime
Sargon of Akkad puts it well:
History disagrees with you.
* Franco
* Mussolini
* Hitler
* Hideki T?j? and the Imperial Way Faction
* Engelbert Dollfuß
* Chiang Kai-shek
* Ante Paveli? and the Ustaše movement
* The Lapua Movement
* The Vichy regime
* Ioannis Metaxas
* Gyula Gömbös
* Afrikaner Weerstandsbeweging
* Verbond van Actualisten
Examples could be multiplied.
History disagrees with you.
* Franco
* Mussolini
* Hitler
* Hideki T?j? and the Imperial Way Faction
* Engelbert Dollfuß
* Chiang Kai-shek
* Ante Paveli? and the Ustaše movement
* The Lapua Movement
* The Vichy regime
* Ioannis Metaxas
* Gyula Gömbös
* Afrikaner Weerstandsbeweging
* Verbond van Actualisten
Examples could be multiplied.
Agreed with this one.
I do disagree with him on some points, though I prefer the way in which he delivers his arguments.
Nowadays there's too much waffle, and tip toeing around issues. One of my favourite quotes by him in an interview (I believe it was channel 4)
"I don't care about your feelings, I care about facts."