Originally posted by Firefly218
^ Killing dem Jews is not protected speech, but technically spreading anti-Semitic propoganda IS protected free speech. Shilling for Cigarette companies IS protected free speech. I say these things shouldn’t be promoted or given platform. Of course that doesn’t condone the violence and rioting at Berkeley, which was wrong.As far as ppl like Milo and Shapiro, they’re more or less fine. I’m saying that Nazis or KKK don’t deserve a stage.
I don't know what to say. I think we agree at about 90% especially the violence at Berkeley comment.
My point is not to censor Free Speech because it scares you. Debate them. Don't hide from them.
Originally posted by Firefly218
Because there’s no conversation to be had with Nazis, they’re done. There’s no rationalizing that bullish!t ideology
Nobody is forcing you or any student to have conversations with anyone. Aren't they being asked to merely...behave like adults if they decide to show up?
Originally posted by SurturI heard this funny comparison once, Indiana Jones is about a liberal arts professor punching Nazis 🙌🙌🙌
Nobody is forcing you or any student to have conversations with anyone. Aren't they being asked to merely...behave like adults if they decide to show up?
Lol, he was secretly a retired pimp who just hates nazis and snakes. But seriously though, don't you think people should either stay away or conduct themselves like adults?
Early 2016 Ben Shapiro speaks at Berkeley, cost of security: $0
Just a few months ago Ben speaks at Berkeley again, cost of security: $600,000
If it helps perhaps people should view this another way: nazis are also very fond of playing the victim. It is pointless to give them the chance to do so. Richard Spencer probably loves it whenever someone punches him.
But still 600k. THAT should piss the students off more than Ben showing up to talk to them. That is insanity lol.
Originally posted by dadudemon
but tried to argue from a point of degrees instead of absolutism, this time. [/B]
Yeah, I'm not sure how that's me admitting that the lack of proportionate voting in our system was democratic. You realize I can say an aspect of our democracy can be undemocratic, without saying our entire system is undemocratic?
I stand by my original statement that disproportionate representation is undemocratic as it makes our democratic system less democratic.
I'm impressed how you managed to take what was at best a semantic gripe and pass that off as actually addressing my argument though.
If only you'd admit you were wrong in the other thread when it comes to the mathWow. It's been a while when I've seen an online poster try to claim they have more credibility than a source they're willing to cite.
Originally posted by Rockydonovang
bla bla bla
You were wrong. Who cares? Just try not to talk in absolutes next time and you won't be so wrong in the future.
Originally posted by Rockydonovang
Wow. It's been a while when I've seen an online poster try to claim they have more credibility than a source they're willing to cite.
Yup, I sure did a better job at math than RCP. For sure. That's 100% verifiable.
Replicate their results and then tell me how you came up with their numbers, using the data that they provided, which they cited for every single source (meaning, their math is meaningless: only the data they collected from the pollsters).
And, so far, yes, I have more credibility than RCP because it looks like I can do averages in excel better than they can. Again, I ask you to do math. Do it. Stop trolling. Do it. Prove me wrong.
Originally posted by Surtur
If it helps perhaps people should view this another way: nazis are also very fond of playing the victim. It is pointless to give them the chance to do so. Richard Spencer probably loves it whenever someone punches him.But still 600k. THAT should piss the students off more than Ben showing up to talk to them. That is insanity lol.
I wish we had Minority Report levels of security (not the prediction, the little spider bots that could record and identify everyone) and every person involved with vandalizing and violence would be caught, beaten savagely, and put on watch for 2 years.
Perhaps people would think twice about doing those things if there was a 100% chance they would get caught and beaten for it.
Severe punishment like that only works with absolute enforcement.* If every murderer and murder case had 100% absolute identification and conviction like that, then perhaps we could revisit the death penalty as a viable option. (As of now, I don't think it is legit except in very rare cases)
*Talking out of my ass but using historical "castle" situations where absolute martial law was enforceable during siege events.
Not triggering, just fucing cool
Originally posted by Firefly218
I heard this funny comparison once, Indiana Jones is about a liberal arts professor punching Nazis 🙌🙌🙌
Originally posted by Rockydonovang
You mean me saying that it was undemocratic to unproportianally represent voters rather than proportionally represent voters in a representative democracy?Yeah, I'm not sure how that's me admitting that the lack of proportionate voting in our system was democratic. You realize I can say an aspect of our democracy can be undemocratic, without saying our entire system is undemocratic?
I stand by my original statement that disproportionate representation is undemocratic as it makes our democratic system less democratic.
I'm impressed how you managed to take what was at best a semantic gripe and pass that off as actually addressing my argument though.
Wow. It's been a while when I've seen an online poster try to claim they have more credibility than a source they're willing to cite.
True democracy doesn't look pretty.
Originally posted by Surtur
Lol, he was secretly a retired pimp who just hates nazis and snakes. But seriously though, don't you think people should either stay away or conduct themselves like adults?Early 2016 Ben Shapiro speaks at Berkeley, cost of security: $0
Just a few months ago Ben speaks at Berkeley again, cost of security: $600,000If it helps perhaps people should view this another way: nazis are also very fond of playing the victim. It is pointless to give them the chance to do so. Richard Spencer probably loves it whenever someone punches him.
But still 600k. THAT should piss the students off more than Ben showing up to talk to them. That is insanity lol.
Students are worth >>>>> 600k, so that's why they get away with as much as they do.
Same reason untenured professors get fired all the time over student complaints. Even at non profits (Like Yale), this happens.
Of course, this means non profits are chasing after money, which probably means non profit higher ed that deals in rich Americans and foreign students (NOT the general public, a requirement to be a non profit) is a big money making scam..
Originally posted by Firefly218
Because there’s no conversation to be had with Nazis, they’re done. There’s no rationalizing that bullish!t ideology
I wonder if you'd say the same about Intersectional Social Justice bullshit, you know, where people argue that white people are collectively guilty of racism, men are collectively guilty of spreading rape culture and the patriarchy, and actually push for segregated spaces where only certain types of identity group are allowed. In fact, some college professors teach that all white people are racist and that it's impossible for black people to be racist.
One of the problems with censorship is that it's so ****ing clear that it will not be applied with a consistent standard. It just won't.
The other problem is, do you think I want to shut down discussions on marxism and intersectional "social justice" bullshit on college campuses? No, because if those are shitty ideologies that are disturbingly further spread than they should be, me censoring the discussion wouldn't actually take care of the problem at all, it wouldn't actually clearly elucidate why these people are ****ing wrong. In fact, it would do the opposite. One commonality among Marxism, Nazism, and Intersectional social justice is that all of these shitty ideologies are motivated in large part by a sense of victimization at the hands of another group, so if you censor these people you're giving them an excuse to play the victim card, and at that point they would be correct in saying their right to free speech is being oppressed, and they could especially make this case if the standard is not consistently applied, which it certainly won't be.
Plus, if we make the decision that somebody can be deplatformed or censored because what they're saying is offensive and there's "no conversation to be had" that's a slippery slope. As seen with students protesting they've also demanded that Milo not be allowed to speak, they've called Ben Shapiro a Nazi. In Canada recently there was attempted censorship of a Teachers Assistant who showed a clip of Jordan Peterson debating compelled pronoun use because it was considered "hateful" and "not a discussion worth having."
And then lastly, censorship is just unethical. We are all granted first amendment rights, and rightly so, and it is unjust to discriminate against people based on ideology at a public university, and dangerous to invite censorship to a college campus.
How is Marxism responsible for death in any way??? ^^^
Are you referring to the mass killings under communist regimes? Because that’s not the same thing as Marxism dude.
Nazis have a core belief that involved the mass murder of people and hatred and bigotry. Marxism is just a hippy philosophy where there’s no money and we all share things together.
Equating the two is a little ridiculous, if you don’t mind me saying so
Originally posted by Firefly218
Not triggering, just fucing cool
I loved this video. When they hug at the end, got tears.
Originally posted by Firefly218
How is Marxism responsible for death in any way??? ^^^Are you referring to the mass killings under communist regimes? Because that’s not the same thing as Marxism dude.
Nazis have a core belief that involved the mass murder of people and hatred and bigotry. Marxism is just a hippy philosophy where there’s no money and we all share things together.
Equating the two is a little ridiculous, if you don’t mind me saying so
This is a very good point. Marxism isn't responsible for killing anyone. Just like guns. Just like drugs.
See, now my liberalness is showing. I want tons of rights all the time.