Violence vs. Free Speech

gaasc

Desperately looking for a title
DONOR
Joined
Apr 26, 2008
Messages
8,100
Location
Honduras
Car(s)
3 of them
I think the problem is that he has moved the border bit of borderline so much that the checks and balances are no longer sure if there is anything to move forward on. Apart from a tweet going "This isn't how it works."

The fact that the president seems to think that Twitter is his prime method of direct communication is perhaps equally concerning.
 

LeVeL

Forum Addict
Joined
Jun 16, 2007
Messages
12,417
You don't think this goes beyond just being a child? No leader of a nation should threaten the press.
He tweets a lot of stupid crap but doesn't really act on it. It's stupid par the course but if I'm not mistaken executive orders wouldn't have any effect on the FCC (which hands out broadcasting licenses) so short of Congressional action there's no threat to NBC from Trump here.
 

JimCorrigan

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2011
Messages
3,977
Location
Pacific Rim
Car(s)
HMCS Velvet Glove; The Last Samurai
He tweets a lot of stupid crap but doesn't really act on it. It's stupid par the course but if I'm not mistaken executive orders wouldn't have any effect on the FCC (which hands out broadcasting licenses) so short of Congressional action there's no threat to NBC from Trump here.
Except, in a climate where many erroneously accuse Trump of being fascist, racist, sexist, etc., the optics matter and it pays to be a proper statesman. He's giving the histrionic masses genuine ammo for their concerns.

He's the fucking president, for crissakes. This behaviour could be excusable/dismissed were he still a private citizen, but not now.
 

prizrak

Forum Addict
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
19,908
Location
No, sleep, till, BROOKLYN
Car(s)
11 Xterra Pro-4x, 12 'stang GT
Except, in a climate where many erroneously accuse Trump of being fascist, racist, sexist, etc., the optics matter and it pays to be a proper statesman. He's giving the histrionic masses genuine ammo for their concerns.

He's the fucking president, for crissakes. This behaviour could be excusable/dismissed were he still a private citizen, but not now.
With you on all of this, it's embarassing having a leader who flies off the handle for every little thing and it detracts from any respect he would otherwise have as a POTUS.

@Lev another thing you should be concerned about is that he is the face of conservatives in the US, it's very difficult to have conversations with people about conservatism and it's ideas when the very word evokes an image of a senile grandpa who flies into rage because there are some kids on his lawn.
 

LeVeL

Forum Addict
Joined
Jun 16, 2007
Messages
12,417
Except, in a climate where many erroneously accuse Trump of being fascist, racist, sexist, etc., the optics matter and it pays to be a proper statesman. He's giving the histrionic masses genuine ammo for their concerns.

He's the fucking president, for crissakes. This behaviour could be excusable/dismissed were he still a private citizen, but not now.
I agree that the optics of this are ready bad, which isn't exactly unusual for the Donald. But I also don't see this as a genuine threat to the 1A as a whole or to NBC specifically.


@Lev another thing you should be concerned about is that he is the face of conservatives in the US, it's very difficult to have conversations with people about conservatism and it's ideas when the very word evokes an image of a senile grandpa who flies into rage because there are some kids on his lawn.
Sadly, I'd rather be associated with Trump than with mainstream GOP who are just embarrassing themselves at this point, but I see your point.
 

JimCorrigan

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2011
Messages
3,977
Location
Pacific Rim
Car(s)
HMCS Velvet Glove; The Last Samurai
Violence vs. Free Speech

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/10/23/opinion/fascism-protest-university-oregon.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

New York Times said:
The Misguided Student Crusade Against ?Fascism?

October 23, 2017
By MICHAEL H. SCHILL

This month, a handful of student protesters at the University of Oregon blocked me from delivering my state-of-the-university speech, one of my jobs as president. I had planned to announce a $50 million gift that would fund several new programs. I ended up posting a recorded version of the speech online.

Armed with a megaphone and raised fists, the protesters shouted about the university?s rising tuition, a perceived corporatization of public higher education and my support for free speech on campus ? a stance they said perpetuated ?fascism and white supremacy.?

I have nothing against protest. It is a time-honored form of communicating dissent. Often, the concerns students express very much deserve to be addressed. But the tactic of silencing, which has been deployed repeatedly at universities around the country, only hurts these activists? cause. Rather than helping people who feel they have little power or voice, students who squelch speech alienate those who are most likely to be sympathetic to their message.

It is also ironic that they would associate fascism with the university during a protest in which they limit discourse. One of the students who stormed the stage during my talk told the news media to ?expect resistance to anyone who opposes us.? That is awfully close to the language and practices of those the students say they vehemently oppose.

Fundamentally, fascism is about the smothering of dissent. Every university in the country has history classes that dig into fascist political movements and examine them along very clear-eyed lines. Fascist regimes rose to power by attacking free speech, threatening violence against those who opposed them, and using fear and the threat of retaliation to intimidate dissenters.

By contrast, American academia is dedicated to rational discourse, shared governance and the protection of dissent. Historically, fascists sought to silence, imprison and even kill university professors and other intellectuals who resisted authoritarian rule. So the accusation that American universities somehow shelter or promote fascism is odd and severely misguided.


Undoubtedly, the term ?fascism? has an effective anti-authoritarian ring to it, so perhaps that is why it is thrown around so much these days. But from what I can tell, much of what students are protesting, both at the University of Oregon and elsewhere, is the expression of viewpoints or ideologies that offend them and make them feel marginalized. They are fed up with what they see as a blanket protection of free speech that, at its extreme, permits the expression of views by neo-Nazis and white supremacists. I am opposed to all these groups stand for, but offensive speech can never be the sole criterion for shutting down a speaker.

The students? own tactics reveal just how malleable the concept of offensiveness can be. For example, the word ?fascism? has deep emotional connotations for me. It?s the reason for great suffering in my family. Two generations ago, members of my extended family were thrown into concentration camps and murdered in Eastern Europe during the Holocaust.

So, when students accuse me of leading an institution that harbors and promotes fascism, it offends me. But does that justify my censoring their speech? Clearly the answer is no.

Without the freedom to express ideas, even those that offend, we cannot challenge the status quo nor move society forward. But student protesters can still change and reform institutions. In 2015, I had been president of the University of Oregon for all of three months when protests erupted around the country over the death of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo. A group called the Black Student Task Force organized a protest right outside my office. I invited the students in for a discussion, and although the matters we discussed, about systemic racism and educational opportunity, were emotionally charged, we established a respectful dialogue. More important, the discussion led to change.

The University of Oregon engaged in a searching and difficult historical examination of racism at the school. We doubled the number of black faculty members, created new programs to enroll more black students, started an African-American lecture series, and raised $1.6 million to build a new black student cultural center. We also invested in symbolic change by removing the name of a former Ku Klux Klan leader from one of our residence halls and replacing it with the name of an illustrious black alumnus.

Educators and students must learn from each other, and nothing is more important to this exchange than free speech. Our future as a university, and more broadly, our future as a nation, depends upon our willingness to hear voices different from our own and engage in meaningful discussion.

We in academia have a lot of big issues to tackle. One such topic ? what to do about speech that offends vulnerable populations and how to protect speech and safety at the same time ? presents a difficult challenge, but that makes the issue that much more important.

As with any important discussion, emotions can run high. But the only way to create change is to grapple with difficult issues. Nothing can be gained by shutting them out.
 
Last edited:

kunedog

Active Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
310
Good takedown of common attempts to sugarcoat Antifa:

mirror: https://vid.me/JXAXH
[video=youtube;Qv-4Pxe8Dz8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qv-4Pxe8Dz8[/video]​


Berkeley admitted that the security around Shapiro's speech cost $600K, in case you were interested in a rough (and likely tip-of-the-iceberg) figure with which to try to estimate the overall cost of Antifa terrorism.

On a positive note, Shapiro's speech also proved that enforcing a no-mask rule does take away one of Antifa's major weapons: violence. Most of us predicted this would be effective based on their tendency to attack everyone filming in their presence (you know, those pesky "camera Nazis"), but of course it's nice to have proof.

Here we have some infighting based solely on skin color:



Because terrorizing the populace is not quite as easy when police do their jobs, these two attempt to order some dope to do their dirty work for them just because he was born lower in the caste syst- . . . uh . . . I mean progessive stack.

Be heartened that, despite the efforts of the alt-left, racists are indeed afraid again.


EDIT: "Takedown" vid was taken down; dunno why.
 
Last edited:

SirEdward

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2008
Messages
1,714
Location
Bologna, Italy
Car(s)
VW Golf MkV
Ouch, the burning irony overwhelming the masked activist... he thinks he is fighting fascists, and the girl next to him suddenly turns against him and makes him plunge down into the white racists, and he can't do nothing about it, because he is a white guy... Boy, enjoy the privilege of being trash-talked and despised for the colour of your skin...

I think she managed to have him out of the movement for good.

If that's the case, I'm happy for him.
 

JakeRadden

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
3,485
Location
Plainfield, Illinois
Car(s)
2014 Mustang, 2015 Edge, 2015 Sonata
Good takedown of common attempts to sugarcoat Antifa:

snipped vid


Berkeley admitted that the security around Shapiro's speech cost $600K, in case you were interested in a rough (and likely tip-of-the-iceberg) figure with which to try to estimate the overall cost of Antifa terrorism.

On a positive note, Shapiro's speech also proved that enforcing a no-mask rule does take away one of Antifa's major weapons: violence. Most of us predicted this would be effective based on their tendency to attack everyone filming in their presence (you know, those pesky "camera Nazis"), but of course it's nice to have proof.

Here we have some infighting based solely on skin color:

snipped vid


Because terrorizing the populace is not quite as easy when police do their jobs, these two attempt to order some dope to do their dirty work for them just because he was born lower in the caste syst- . . . uh . . . I mean progessive stack.

Be heartened that, despite the efforts of the alt-left, racists are indeed afraid again.
I am a huge proponent of Shaprio's method for speeches. He directly called out the schools for their inability to protect speakers and ensure their ability to speak, while having healthy respect for the protesters and defending their right to protest him. His speech in Berkley was a perfect precedent to set where he openly, repeatedly called for his supports to reject the violence that had been perpetrated during previous events, and placed the responsibility for assurance of mutual rights where it belongs - on the people hosting the event. I was not particularly happy when my alma mater (DePaul University) banned him from campus due to student backlash, while pretending to be a bastion of free speech.
 
Last edited:

kunedog

Active Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
310
kunedog;n3395026 said:
Well worth listening to at least the intro (11 minutes):


The shitstorm Harris caught over this podcast has flared up again, with some hit pieces by Vox implying there's no legimate science behind it, and downplaying the fact that thugs are showing up to colleges to beat scientists.

Harris and Vox's editor Ezra Klein had it out:




Harris wants Klein to stop smearing him and Murray by associating them with white supremacy, and to acknowledge that the scientific method cannot be limited by (and does not care about) political correctness. Klein repeatedly sidesteps this point and attempts to apply a progressive filter to absolutely everything, including scientific data. He wants Sam to pollute a discussion about genetic science with one about slavery and segregation.

Biased (but IMO spot on) analysis:

 
Last edited:
Top