“This is what tolerance looks like at UC Berkeley”

[Belz...]

I believe in free speech, as defined in the first amendment. I'm not talking about robbing Milo or anyone else of his free speech. In fact, I am unable to do so.

I think you'll find that punching him repeatedly will have a very real effect on his right to free speech.

 

[Belz...]

And the appropriate response, if you believe in free speech, is more speech. Milo should expect people to say things about him. But in a civil society, he should not expect to be punched. And shopkeepers in the town he visits shouldn't expect their windows to be smashed.

Seriously, it's a cold day in hell when Zig and I agree on social or political issues. You should take notice, uke2se.

 

[Belz...]

Is it because all things Catholic look like they've been designed by Liberace?

One guy I know uses the catchphrase 'that looks as gay as a Cathedral'. Don't know if he came up with that himself or if it is a meme in the gay community.

What are you smoking? Cathedrals look fabulous!

 

[Ziggurat]

Seriously, it's a cold day in hell when Zig and I agree on social or political issues.

You're telling me. I'm freezing my nuts off down here!

 

[Belz...]

You're telling me. I'm freezing my nuts off down here!

I told you to bring more than just a thong.

 

[uke2se]

And again, how often does that actually work? The autocracy-to-democracy regimes I can think of were done with outside occupation (Japan, Germany).

I don't know. I still think it's worth fighting for.

The goal isn't the same as the results.

Sometimes they are.

Aside from well-funded public and mandatory education, I don't have a solution for you.

Ok. I'd keep my knuckles warmed up if I were American then.

Including yourself, when others see you as despicable?

I don't think I'm despicable, so no.

Do you think punching people somehow turns them to your side, or convinces them of the error of their ways, or makes them less likely to use violence in turn?

No, but punching authoritarians speaks to them in a language they understand.

I disagree with you on this. State-condoned violence is NOT a path you want to go down.

I never said anything about the violence I talked about being state condoned. In fact, I've been pretty open with it being punished by the state. It's against the law, after all.

 

[uke2se]

I think you'll find that punching him repeatedly will have a very real effect on his right to free speech.

Punching him once won't. Unless you punch him really hard and break his jaw. He could still write, though, so you'd have to break his fingers too.

 

[Ziggurat]

I told you to bring more than just a thong.

Well played, good sir.

 

[uke2se]

Seriously, it's a cold day in hell when Zig and I agree on social or political issues. You should take notice, uke2se.

Damned you, you forced me to glance at a Ziggurat post.

As already noted, countering speech with speech is all well and good when the Nazis and the fascists and the bigots are held up by society as pariahs. When they are the ones in power, however, just speaking doesn't work anymore.

 

[Belz...]

I don't know. I still think it's worth fighting for.

Sure, for when it works.

I don't think I'm despicable, so no.

You didn't say that Milo had to think of himself as despicable before he deserved punching, so that determination will be made by the one punching you.

No, but punching authoritarians speaks to them in a language they understand.

Yes, and a language they'll be more than happy to return to you now that you've made it acceptable.

I never said anything about the violence I talked about being state condoned.

Then you don't seem to know whether or not it's ok to punch people.

 

[Belz...]

Damned you, you forced me to glance at a Ziggurat post.

Bet'cha you can't eat just one.

 

[uke2se]

You didn't say that Milo had to think of himself as despicable before he deserved punching, so that determination will be made by the one punching you.

But you asked me. And I don't think I'm despicable, so I don't think it would be right to punch me for being despicable.

You may note that I don't consider the feelings of fascists and other societal rejects here. That's intentional.

Yes, and a language they'll be more than happy to return to you now that you've made it ok.

It's always been ok with them. It's not because of fear of retaliation that you don't see Nazis punched every time they stick their heads out. It's because most people are descent people like you, and they don't think violence solves anything. They were right, too. And then the world changed.

Then you don't seem to know whether or not it's ok to punch people.

No, I know. I think it's right to punch people that contribute to the gradual undermining of democracy and who spew vile bigotry, trying to move society towards authoritarianism. We've already had this discussion.

 

[Belz...]

But you asked me. And I don't think I'm despicable, so I don't think it would be right to punch me for being despicable.

You may note that I don't consider the feelings of fascists and other societal rejects here. That's intentional.

But see, this is the problem: it's entirely subjective. Of course you don't consider yourself despicable. Few people think of themselves that way. We tend to think we're right. But you say Milo could be punched because he's despicable. You have your own means of determining that, but who's doing the punching if not the person who has come to that conclusion, and how can we make sure that this person has come to that conclusion justifiably? The reason I ask is because if you think your own conclusion about Milo is correct based on nothing but your own subjective values, then it follows that someone who has the same conclusion about _you_ would be justified in punching you whether you agreed with them or not.

And then the world changed.

No, it hasn't. T'was always so.

I think it's right to punch people that contribute to the gradual undermining of democracy and who spew vile bigotry, trying to move society towards authoritarianism.

You think it's right, but that it should be illegal? How do you reconcile those two?

 

[xjx388]

But you asked me. And I don't think I'm despicable, so I don't think it would be right to punch me for being despicable.

But if someone else found your ideas despicable, you would take the punch knowing that they acted in a morally correct way?

You may note that I don't consider the feelings of fascists and other societal rejects here. That's intentional.

It's always been ok with them. It's not because of fear of retaliation that you don't see Nazis punched every time they stick their heads out. It's because most people are descent people like you, and they don't think violence solves anything. They were right, too. And then the world changed.

No, I know. I think it's right to punch people that contribute to the gradual undermining of democracy and who spew vile bigotry, trying to move society towards authoritarianism. We've already had this discussion.

As determined by you, apparently. Your words here could be interpreted by others as "undermining democracy..." So if you were punched, the puncher would be morally justified and you wouldn't sue for assault, presumably.

 

[Ziggurat]

Punching him once won't. Unless you punch him really hard and break his jaw. He could still write, though, so you'd have to break his fingers too.

First, your standard for who violence could be applied to expanded. Now, your standard for what violence could be applied is expanding. You think things can stop there? No, they can't.

There is no limiting principle to your position.

 

[sunmaster14]

First, your standard for who violence could be applied to expanded. Now, your standard for what violence could be applied is expanding. You think things can stop there? No, they can't.

There is no limiting principle to your position.

uke2se's demented view is becoming quite common on the left. The whole idea behind calling (even unintentionally) offensive speech a microaggression is to re-categorize it as a form of violence. In which case violence in response is appropriate. After all, only pacifists have a problem with responding to violence with violence.

 

[Newtons Bit]

No, I know. I think it's right to punch people that contribute to the gradual undermining of democracy and who spew vile bigotry, trying to move society towards authoritarianism. We've already had this discussion.

And I think that punching people for speech is a serious undermining of Democracy. What now?

 

[Belz...]

First, your standard for who violence could be applied to expanded. Now, your standard for what violence could be applied is expanding. You think things can stop there? No, they can't.

There is no limiting principle to your position.

Indeed, uke2se is demonstrating exactly the dangers we are pointing out to him.

uke2se's demented view is becoming quite common on the left. The whole idea behind calling (even unintentionally) offensive speech a microaggression is to re-categorize it as a form of violence. In which case violence in response is appropriate.

I hadn't thought of it that way, but I think you're right.

And I think that punching people for speech is a serious undermining of Democracy. What now?

Obviously we ALL need some punching.

 

[Mumbles]

I hadn't thought of it that way, but I think you're right.

It's worth pointing out that saying that "feminism is cancer" or inciting harassment against a trans student at a university he was giving a speech at is not at all a "microaggression", it's outright hostility - and in the latter case is particularly despicable. Milo has done both. I don'/t think Milo "believes in" anything except himself - he was openly hostile to gamers right up until Gamergate started harassing women. But if anything, he's even more disgusting than Spencer is, if only because Spencer is basically a coward.

 

[xjx388]

It's worth pointing out that saying that "feminism is cancer" or inciting harassment against a trans student at a university he was giving a speech at is not at all a "microaggression", it's outright hostility - and in the latter case is particularly despicable. Milo has done both. I don'/t think Milo "believes in" anything except himself - he was openly hostile to gamers right up until Gamergate started harassing women. But if anything, he's even more disgusting than Spencer is, if only because Spencer is basically a coward.

OK, but surely you would agree that holding a door open for someone is not an aggression of any type? But we've been assured this is a microaggression and is offensive because it undermines the dignity, strength and independence of the person you are opening the door for.