Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mathemagicien)
    We ban euthanasia/assisted suicide...
    Do you think that it should be banned?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yudothis)
    Does it matter? They were protesting him, and you know as well as I do that wherever he goes, he spreads his anger.
    They weren't protesting, they were vandalising and assaulting people. That is on them.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Willy Pete)
    They weren't protesting, they were vandalising and assaulting people. That is on them.
    The vast majority of Berkely students that protested had long gone before the black bloc arrived to cause mayhem. I would call this group a terrorist organization. At best they are anarchists. At any rate, they have nothing to do with the absolute vast majority of reasoned Berkely students that are appalled by what Milo represents and protested peacefully against him.
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yudothis)
    I also disagree with how far PC has gone. But a) that doesn't mean I go cry about it like Milo and his goons do, and b) it certainly doesn't mean that the very other extreme to over the top PC is the solution. Not to mention if you look at the motives behind each, at least PC is based on an (if more and more misguided) idea of being "nice", whereas Milo and the so-called "free speech" advocates think it is their "right" to go around insulting whomever they want just because. If you had the option of a totalitarian regime that follows Milo and one that follows PC, which one would you choose? Which one would be a more pleasant world to live in?

    Milo is an *******. How can anyone wonder why people hate him?
    Milo and his ilk are anti-totalitarian. Being able to say what you want is inherently anti-totalitarian. I absurdity of comparing people like him (a gay Jew who believes in absolute freedom of speech) with the nazis whilst you go around assaulting people is hilarious.

    I don't really care about Milo, I don't find his shtick interesting. The funny part is you are driving these moderates to the far right. If you call everyone to the right of Jeb Bush a nazi and say it's okay to assualt nazis, eventually those people are going to be perfectly happy with the police cracking your skull with a batton or a bullet.

    /pol/ is largely far right website yet by the looks of it's members that showed up to the HWNDU livestream it's also very diverse. You have non-white conservatives allying themselves with (in some cases) literal Nazis simply because of how much people absolutely despise the left right now.

    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yudothis)
    The vast majority of Berkely students that protested had long gone before the black bloc arrived to cause mayhem. I would call this group a terrorist organization. At best they are anarchists. At any rate, they have nothing to do with the absolute vast majority of reasoned Berkely students that are appalled by what Milo represents and protested peacefully against him.
    What does Milo represent?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Willy Pete)
    What does Milo represent?
    Hate and anger. He is a little angry child that wants attention and has found a niche for it.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    You are ignorant if you don't see there is a clear difference between deliberate hate speech, and freedom of speech...
    I am naturally for free speech, but there should be a limit! Using speech to get a reaction or incite hatred is a violation of a human right

    And for that Milo guy, I laugh at people like him...sad people who crave attention a bit like Katie Hopkins by using controversial rhetoric to push their own prejudice and shunned agendas.

    And to say the left is regressing because of this is absurd, would you have made this post if a bunch of neo-nazis protested against something like black history month...no
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BusyStarGazing)
    You are ignorant if you don't see there is a clear difference between deliberate hate speech, and freedom of speech...
    I am naturally for free speech, but there should be a limit! Using speech to get a reaction or incite hatred is a violation of a human right

    And for that Milo guy, I laugh at people like him...sad people who crave attention a bit like Katie Hopkins by using controversial rhetoric to push their own prejudice and shunned agendas.

    And to say the left is regressing because of this is absurd, would you have made this post if a bunch of neo-nazis protested against something like black history month...no
    If you can not say something then free speech does not exist.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by housat)
    Milo and his ilk are anti-totalitarian. Being able to say what you want is inherently anti-totalitarian. I absurdity of comparing people like him (a gay Jew who believes in absolute freedom of speech) with the nazis whilst you go around assaulting people is hilarious.

    I don't really care about Milo, I don't find his shtick interesting. The funny part is you are driving these moderates to the far right. If you call everyone to the right of Jeb Bush a nazi and say it's okay to assualt nazis, eventually those people are going to be perfectly happy with the police cracking your skull with a batton or a bullet.

    /pol/ is largely far right website yet by the looks of it's members that showed up to the HWNDU livestream it's also very diverse. You have non-white conservatives allying themselves with (in some cases) literal Nazis simply because of how much people absolutely despise the left right now.
    For one I did not call him a Nazi. Though given how some of his disgusting views are paralleled by the Nazis, I can see the comparison. The Nazis just had totalitarianism as one aspect, as well, remember that.

    Most people who are opposed to Milo do not go around assaulting people. Stop generalizing.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    If you can not say something then free speech does not exist.
    It does not exist.

    And you are a hypocrite for thinking it does. You are against free speech of Muslim (hate) preachers, are you not?
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    When was the last time the alt-right got together and started rioting in the streets?

    Do you think people should be banned from trying gay conversion therapy if they want to try it?
    That's a pretty weak argument to be honest. There's a lot of things that individual people might want to try (illegal drugs, euthanasia) that we don't allow if the potential negatives to society outweigh the positives. And let's not pretend gay conversion therapy is a legitimate medical technique. There is no evidence base whatsoever showing it works, and it has been abundantly proven that sexuality is set in stone very early on in the development cycle. (Not even getting into the damage to the individual in pretending being homosexual is a disorder and the root of any underlying mental condition).

    I don't agree with the outcry against Milo's speech in Berkeley. But that doesn't escape the fact that it's pretty ridiculous for the right to berate the entire left for being 'intolerant' given the actions of a very few, especially given their hypocritically intolerant views on the issues I mentioned.

    However, on the note of the 'alt-right' being tolerant, here's a video of Richard Spencer, known alt-right advocate, celebrating Trump's victory in Washington in a speech espousing White Supremacy and actual Nazi salutes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1o6-bi3jlxk

    (Not saying all Trump supporters are racist or anything, just pointing out the stupidity of the right for criticising the intolerance of the left based on the actions of very few, whilst being supported by many alt-right groups who could very easily be criticised in the same way)
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yudothis)
    It does not exist.

    And you are a hypocrite for thinking it does. You are against free speech of Muslim (hate) preachers, are you not?
    No they can say what they want.

    When instead of ideas it turns into the action of recruiting terrorists that is wrong, not the words but the action.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yudothis)
    At any rate, they have nothing to do with the absolute vast majority of reasoned Berkely students that are appalled by what Milo represents and protested peacefully against him.
    People who go to 'protest' other people's events either do so to silence them, which is absolutely unacceptable, especially on a university campus, or just to be trendy and join in with yelling about their opinions in public, in which case they are depressing losers who need to find something productive to do with their time.

    They are such unbearable narcissists. They are also apparently very stupid. To go out and protest the fact that people are sharing ideas which are different from yours is pathetic and wrong in itself, but given they presumably opposed Milo's ideas being widely shared perhaps doing this and catapulting him into the mainstream national media spotlight was also just strategically ridiculous.
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yudothis)
    For one I did not call him a Nazi. Though given how some of his disgusting views are paralleled by the Nazis, I can see the comparison. The Nazis just had totalitarianism as one aspect, as well, remember that.

    Most people who are opposed to Milo do not go around assaulting people. Stop generalizing.
    Which of his veiws are paralleled by the nazis? He's literally a gay coke snorting Jew that has sex with black men. You average muslim is about 100000000000000000x closer to a nazi then Milo. Hell, your average muslim is closer to the nazis then white nationalists like Richard Spencer are. In fact by the standards of the western left, the vast majority of the world are extreme radical neo-nazis.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    No they can say what they want.

    When instead of ideas it turns into the action of recruiting terrorists that is wrong, not the words but the action.
    I see, so you have never ranted against them, nor has anyone else on this forum sharing your general political view?
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    If you can not say something then free speech does not exist.
    I've always been fascinated by the concept of free speech personally, I am totally for people being able to rise up and use their voice to help create change. Some of the great civil rights have been made by our ability to speak up in anger.

    But you are a fool if you wouldn't accept that many heinous and vile things have been done because people have abused this right... free speech can and will always incite hatred, whether this is a good thing is up to you to decide
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by housat)
    Which of his veiws are paralleled by the nazis? He's literally a gay coke snorting Jew that has sex with black men. You average muslim is about 100000000000000000x closer to a nazi then Milo. Hell, your average muslim is closer to the nazis then white nationalists like Richard Spencer are. In fact by the standards of the western left, the vast majority of the world are extreme radical neo-nazis.
    Dude ****ing chill man omg looooool
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by housat)
    Which of his veiws are paralleled by the nazis? He's literally a gay coke snorting Jew that has sex with black men. You average muslim is about 100000000000000000x closer to a nazi then Milo. Hell, your average muslim is closer to the nazis then white nationalists like Richard Spencer are.
    "Oh look at me, I am a gay Jew, if anyone should feel discriminated against it's me, I don't feel discriminated against so of course neither is anyone else".

    By running on an agenda of hate towards others he is showing us that he believes himself to be something better than those people. He believes he has the right to discriminate against them.

    But yes, you are right, religions in an of themselves share this with Nazism, too. But not just Muslims, Jews, too, they too think they are God's chosen people.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Percypig17)
    That's a pretty weak argument to be honest. There's a lot of things that individual people might want to try (illegal drugs, euthanasia) that we don't allow if the potential negatives to society outweigh the positives. And let's not pretend gay conversion therapy is a legitimate medical technique. There is no evidence base whatsoever showing it works, and it has been abundantly proven that sexuality is set in stone very early on in the development cycle. (Not even getting into the damage to the individual in pretending being homosexual is a disorder and the root of any underlying mental condition).

    I don't agree with the outcry against Milo's speech in Berkeley. But that doesn't escape the fact that it's pretty ridiculous for the right to berate the entire left for being 'intolerant' given the actions of a very few, especially given their hypocritically intolerant views on the issues I mentioned.

    However, on the note of the 'alt-right' being tolerant, here's a video of Richard Spencer, known alt-right advocate, celebrating Trump's victory in Washington in a speech espousing White Supremacy and actual Nazi salutes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1o6-bi3jlxk

    (Not saying all Trump supporters are racist or anything, just pointing out the stupidity of the right for criticising the intolerance of the left based on the actions of very few, whilst being supported by many alt-right groups who could very easily be criticised in the same way)
    I never said it was but if someone wants to try it should they be stopped? This is in line with my position on drugs and euthanasia which I think should be legal.

    You want to share the video of Richard spencer being punched while giving an interview in the street?

    Did the salute actually hurt anyone? I think it is stupid but who did it physically hurt? I have no problem if these rioters stand there protesting that is their right and I can disagree and call them stupid but when it turns into physical violence that is where the problem begins.

    Was it ok when Richard Spencer got punched? Is political violence acceptable?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yudothis)
    Hate and anger. He is a little angry child that wants attention and has found a niche for it.
    Have you got a sensible response?
 
 
 
The home of Results and Clearing

2,317

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year
Poll
A-level students - how do you feel about your results?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.