The right to free speech does not give you a right to a platform. -Owen Jones
The title quote by Owen Jones sums it up. It's not a case of Free Speech means you have to be heard, if people don't want to listen to you why should they have to?
Rightists don't understand the majority of people with any kind of Education or brains often find their views disgusting as well as they find the views of many radicals including radical Islamists like Anjem Choudary (I might add most Muslims also find Choudary disgusting and speak out against him, it's just not reported).
Gay cures, Anjem Choudary, Tommy Robinson, none of these deserve a platform for normal people.
If the majority of students at a University find Milo disgusting why should they have to have him near them.
Why would you shift the poles in the discussion from free speech/platform to an acceptable distance from people you oppose views with?
In as far as a platform, if a group of individuals invites Milo to university to have a discussion in an auditorium then those that oppose his positions aren't forced to listen to him.
Ahh but the University has a right to refuse him entry if the majority do not want him. Although like with Tommy Robinson (not his real name, but the name of another football hooligan he admires), previously banned from the US as an illegal immigrant, if people want him they can listen to him, like at Columbia. Although perhaps the Columbia University College Republicans club, which is organised his entry should have been more honest about how they described Mr Robinson. They said he was “an important political figure in England and Europe”, who has “championed the notion that radical Islam is incompatible with Western values and the freedoms we currently enjoy”.
It also claimed Mr Robinson “has been jailed unfairly due to his politics, which should frighten any American who values freedom of speech.”
The promotional material gave no explanation as to when or where Mr Robinson might have been “unfairly jailed”.
Nor did it mention that the EDL founder was jailed for 12 months for a drunken assault in 2005, jailed again in January 2013 for using someone else’s passport to enter the US illegally, and again in January 2014 for his part in a £160,000 mortgage fraud.
Mr Robinson, who founded the EDL in 2009 but left the street-protest group in October 2013, has repeatedly been accused of making inflammatory and divisive statements about Muslims.
The day after the Manchester Arena attack, he made an online video in which he stood outside a mosque in the city, alleging that 16 people within a two-mile radius had fought for Isis, and claiming: “In these houses are enemy combatants.
etc.
However, unlike the UK refusing entry to that Lauren Southern thing, Columbia hasn't told the truth about who Robinson is.
No one is moving any goal posts, people have always had a right to not give a platform to scum if they own the platform or the majority do not want to hear it.
It's only the red pillers in their dream world who don't get that.
I don't keep up with Robinson so I have a hard time having a decent discussion about who is and what he does other then flash in the pan quick search videos.
On the note of public Universities, if they are on the govt dole they cannot prevent free speech. Private universities can of course prevent them from coming and there you go.
You said this:
Unless the word near means something different in the UK, in the USA that has to do with proximity and not dialogue.
Last edited by snowdragon on Jul 3rd, 2018 at 01:23 PM
And Public Universities have a right to protest and make it uncomfortable for them if they do not have the right to exclude them. Although I would suggest if the majority of the student body and staff do not wish to hear them, they have no right to a large hall, just the janitors closet. We are more democratic in the UK and would go with the majority view, stands to reason.
__________________
Last edited by Putinbot1 on Jul 3rd, 2018 at 01:24 PM
The right to a large hall has nothing to do with whether or not specific people want to hear the individuals, they don't have to even go to the appearance.
If people want to protest, go ahead. No violent protests, don't block individuals from entering said venue, easy peasy.
I've personally never wanted to stop anyone talking. But free speech is basically being used to say what you want and not be challenged over it. To not be given a platform is not an infringement of free speech if it is a majority decision.
If student unions refuse to provide a platform to those they deem bigots, that is not an attack on freedom of speech. They are simply telling the bigots: you may have the legal right to say things we find offensive or even disgraceful, but that does not mean we are compelled to provide you with the advantage of amplifying such bigotry to our audience. It is striking that when the bigotry of a far-right figure is verbally challenged, their apologists will screech that freedom of speech is under attack. For the far right, “freedom of speech” means “the right to say hateful things without being challenged”.
But those on the far right do not believe in freedom at all. They call for the banning of mosques, banning of burqas, mass deportation of migrants and refugees, clamping down on civil liberties. They portray their opponents as traitors. Condemning the likes of Yaxley-Lennon instantly brings threats of violence on social media: recent messages I’ve received include “Owen Jones your get what’s coming to you very soon you prick”, “Until one day one of us bumps into you I can’t wait”, “I hope someone fills your jaw you little prick”, “Remember places, traitors’ faces, you will pay for crimes”, ad infinitum...
So mob rules the day with emotional responses elicited by the loudest vocal minority.
This is myopic and a fool's errand, in the USA one only has to look at Berkely denies Bill Maher (very liberal) a platform, Berkley protests calling Ben Shapiro(very jewish) a nazi, Brett Weinstein (forced off campus when the vocal minority wanted everyone to not enter campus for activism) called racist.
If the measure of the majority is used to determine the value of free speech, then you have lost your understanding of freedom and liberty.
Not the loudest minority, the majority, in the UK all students in a University belong to the SU. the SU provides the platform for guests. As in any representative democracy, the SU is ruled by the majority opinion of the representatives or in important matters direct vote or referendum. If a direct vote says Tommy Robinson is not wanted the majority have spoken, then the majority do not wish to give him a platform or hear his words as he is unwanted. The US is clearly different and not as democratic in this.
But what they do have a right to is to speak if they are invited. And whiny little weasels from the college do not get to use the hecklers veto to stop it.
And guess what snowflakes? If you don't agree with a speaker do not attend their speech.
Oh and since we're discussing free speech: kneeling during the national anthem isn't a free speech issue either.
__________________ Chicken Boo, what's the matter with you? You don't act like the other chickens do. You wear a disguise to look like human guys, but you're not a man you're a Chicken Boo.
I will never understand why grown ass adults who don't like a speaker are not simply capable of...not attending the speech.
If just being on the same campus as someone they disagree with triggers them...that is the most pathetic thing in the universe.
And most kids on college campuses lean left As do most professors. If we go by the majority there would NEVER be a conservative speaker at these places again.
__________________ Chicken Boo, what's the matter with you? You don't act like the other chickens do. You wear a disguise to look like human guys, but you're not a man you're a Chicken Boo.
Ah, a red piller, fortunately in the UK we have democratic voting and can simply refuse to give them a platform democratically. Student's in the US are clearly not given the ability to democratically make decisions. That doesn't make them snowflakes, just disempowered and lacking responsibility.
Lol if a student can't handle a speaker they disagree with being on campus that makes them a snowflake. Period.
If you don't like a speech don't listen. If it's difficult for adults to do then it's time to leave college all together and go back to pre school.
__________________ Chicken Boo, what's the matter with you? You don't act like the other chickens do. You wear a disguise to look like human guys, but you're not a man you're a Chicken Boo.
We know from history over and over again if you develop the proper message line that illicit some strong emotional response the minority easily controls the mobs (that is the very nature of rule itself.)
The fastest way to stamp out minorities, freedoms, and liberty is to have majority rule in place. Majority rule doesn't make something better or more "fair," generally it's the opposite. As culture changes, mores change one has to be careful of the mob, what is acceptable today might not be tomorrow and heaven help those that don't fall in line.
I understand your position though, what I mean by that is I too could argue for majority rulings and the prevention of free speech (as it pertains to "hate speech etc."
Last edited by snowdragon on Jul 3rd, 2018 at 02:40 PM
The problem is a majority of snowflakes on campuses lean left. As do a vast majority of teachers.
Giving these jackals final say over who speaks would just turn these campuses even further left(if that is even possible) and that will never ever be a positive thing.
If they are gonna whine over conservative speakers...fine, do not invite a single leftist to speak either. Stay consistent and try not to be weasels.
Speaking of left leaning speakers...I will note you rarely hear about cons using the hecklers veto to stop speech.
__________________ Chicken Boo, what's the matter with you? You don't act like the other chickens do. You wear a disguise to look like human guys, but you're not a man you're a Chicken Boo.
Leftists in this country should move to the UK. It's far easier to be a snowflake and crack down on speech that hurts ya fee fee's in that country. It would be a dream come true for them. I bet they'd get a hard on just knowing a guy got fined for a nazi dog joke. They'll be having wet dreams about an American where they can implement these same backwards views on speech.
__________________ Chicken Boo, what's the matter with you? You don't act like the other chickens do. You wear a disguise to look like human guys, but you're not a man you're a Chicken Boo.
Wow, I can't believe people are actually arguing that it's ok to ban minorities from speaking.
__________________ posted by Badabing
I don't know why some of you are going on about being right and winning. Rob and Impediment were in on this gag because I PMed them. Silent and Rao PMed me and figured I changed the post. I highly doubt anybody thought Quan made the post, but simply played along just for the lulz.
Fascist Alt-Right broflakes need to be allowed to rant imo, as long as they're not inciting violence, as freedom of speech/freedom of expression is important so you take the good with the bad. I don't necessarily like it, but I accept it for the greater good.
But you're talking to a guy who lost it because a black man knelled peacefully and quietly in protest. Somehow that's too much.
Re: The right to free speech does not give you a right to a platform. -Owen Jones
Right. Which is why no one forces you to show up to a speech or talk you don't like. If you don't like it, don't show up. If you like it or are curious, show up.
I don't believe that is the case in almost every situation. The problem is a vocal, and sometimes violent, minority of leftist babies throwing tantrums and destroying property because they don't like to be told that there are Muslim Rape Gangs and that Identify Politics are toxic bullshit.
Re: Re: The right to free speech does not give you a right to a platform. -Owen Jones
And any time someone like Jordan Peterson brings it up, they dance around the question.
Such controvery like "When can the left go too far"?
After a long, long list from him of the right going too far.
__________________ What CDTM believes;
Never let anyone else define you. Don't be a jerk just to be a jerk, but if you are expressing your true inner feelings and beliefs, or at least trying to express that inner child, and everyone gets pissed off about it, never NEVER apologize for it. Let them think what they want, let them define you in their narrow little minds while they suppress every last piece of them just to keep a friend that never liked them for themselves in the first place.
KMC Community Forums
Jul 3rd, 2018 08:59 AM
