cutuphalfdead wrote:Freedom of speech isn't freedom of platform. Milo can say what he wants, but if it's my venue I can tell him to go home.
This happens often...people confuse "freedom of speech" with "freedom from any and all consequences or ramifications of speech." It's the same thing when someone's show gets cancelled because of boycotts and protests. If a business (or a school) decides the protests make the person not worth the trouble, their speech isn't inhibited if that show gets cancelled.
Except no one here is confusing those things here.
This kind of seems like what you are doing? confusing this?
Both sides have the right to free speech. Both sides exercised that right. 1 side "won" out because the college institution listened to its "constituents" who pay their fucking bills.
Violence is not a form of free speech.
You either have free speech or you dont
And again, when such a small % of people protesting through out this land turns violent......
The only way this could be spun as a loss of "free speech" is that UC Berkeley gets state funding, so it's not necessarily a private institution. But I don't get the impression from Burt that he thinks this is a problem only having to do with public colleges and universities.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.
Last edited by BurtReynolds on Tue March 07, 2023 3:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
cutuphalfdead wrote:Freedom of speech isn't freedom of platform. Milo can say what he wants, but if it's my venue I can tell him to go home.
The venue wanted him there.
Until the students said they didn't. And I'd consider the student body to be a part of the overall institution, or the venue.
The lunatics shouldn't run the asylum.
Now who's the authoritarian?
Yeah because I think dumbass students shouldn't have a say in who the school allows to talk, that makes me an authoritarian. They can protest peacefully outside if they want.
They are STUDENTS.
They're also adults. This is a college, not a middle school.
So? It's moronic to allow students much say in what they are allowed to hear at a school.
That's how this ignorant safe space bullshit started in the first place.
Or it can be a judgment call. Maybe the school can listen to them, and then decide?
I'm sure they did listen. It's fucking Berkeley. Then they had the audacity to act like adults and allow free speech to occur at their university.
Except what he was going to say matters here. He wanted to name undocumented students at a speech in which he was going to incite the crowd against illegal immigration. The school has a responsibility not to let that happen.
cutuphalfdead wrote:You're right, they should have just let him out those undocumented students after whipping the crowd up into an anti-immigrant fervor. It would have been safer that way.
It's not anti immigration, it's anti ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION. Why is this so hard for you goons to understand?
Yes, xenophobic assholes are always very careful to make this distinction.
Don't be retarded. I fully support legal immigrants, and I've literally never met anyone that doesn't. Illegal immigration hurts everyone, but it especially hurts the poor. Why do you hate the poor?
Illegal immigration does not hurt me. Not 1 bit.
Check your privilege.
You are the epitome of privilege. And fuck you for making me say that. Now I want to throw up.
If this is an argument of "are certain students at UC Berkeley ignorant, close-minded asses," than that's an argument far easier to win. But that's a different argument than the inhibition of "freedom of speech."
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.
Last edited by BurtReynolds on Tue March 07, 2023 3:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
cutuphalfdead wrote:Freedom of speech isn't freedom of platform. Milo can say what he wants, but if it's my venue I can tell him to go home.
The venue wanted him there.
Until the students said they didn't. And I'd consider the student body to be a part of the overall institution, or the venue.
The lunatics shouldn't run the asylum.
Now who's the authoritarian?
Yeah because I think dumbass students shouldn't have a say in who the school allows to talk, that makes me an authoritarian. They can protest peacefully outside if they want.
They are STUDENTS.
They're also adults. This is a college, not a middle school.
So? It's moronic to allow students much say in what they are allowed to hear at a school.
That's how this ignorant safe space bullshit started in the first place.
Or it can be a judgment call. Maybe the school can listen to them, and then decide?
I'm sure they did listen. It's fucking Berkeley. Then they had the audacity to act like adults and allow free speech to occur at their university.
Except what he was going to say matters here. He wanted to name undocumented students at a speech in which he was going to incite the crowd against illegal immigration. The school has a responsibility not to let that happen.
This has nothing to do with students dictating speech on campus, but from everything I heard he wasn't going to do that, nor would he be allowed to.
Last edited by BurtReynolds on Tue March 07, 2023 3:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.
Last edited by BurtReynolds on Tue March 07, 2023 3:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
So burt doesnt really love free speech either then is wha tim kind of gathering here.
And to say liberals hate free speech is just stupid fucking right wing meme bullshit which i know burt is much smarter than that. Because a very small minority of protesters turned violent then all of a sudden liberals hate free speech? give me a break. How many millions of people have marched and protested peacefully? Or should they just shut up and except shit and move on?
Then i guess conservatives hate free speech too because when they dont agree with someone they just kill a fag, a muslim, or arm themselves up and overtake federal buildings.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.
Last edited by BurtReynolds on Tue March 07, 2023 3:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
digster wrote:The only way this could be spun as a loss of "free speech" is that UC Berkeley gets state funding, so it's not necessarily a private institution. But I don't get the impression from Burt that he thinks this is a problem only having to do with public colleges and universities.
It's a loss for free speech because violent protesters prevented free speech on a campus that permitted free speech. How is this so hard to understand?
You seem to take my saying it's not necessarily a question of "freedom of speech" with defending violence, which I'm not. So let me take this approach; what if there's no violence? What if overwhelming protests make a university cancel a speech by Milo? Is his free speech being inhibited?
And pertaining to your last post, I'm having difficulty parsing it. Who is it that we're talking about that's ANTI-free speech? Is it certain individuals, or a certain ideology?
Last edited by digster on Tue March 07, 2017 3:08 am, edited 1 time in total.
BurtReynolds wrote:And none of this has anything to do with yesterday's violence. There were no speakers that I am aware of. There were peaceful protesters that were attacked by fucking antifa scum. Because they are ANTI free speech. It's in their doctrine.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.
Last edited by BurtReynolds on Tue March 07, 2023 3:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
BurtReynolds wrote:And none of this has anything to do with yesterday's violence. There were no speakers that I am aware of. There were peaceful protesters that were attacked by fucking antifa scum. Because they are ANTI free speech. It's in their doctrine.
Strat wrote:So burt doesnt really love free speech either then is wha tim kind of gathering here.
And to say liberals hate free speech is just stupid fucking right wing meme bullshit which i know burt is much smarter than that. Because a very small minority of protesters turned violent then all of a sudden liberals hate free speech? give me a break. How many millions of people have marched and protested peacefully? Or should they just shut up and except shit and move on?
Then i guess conservatives hate free speech too because when they dont agree with someone they just kill a fag, a muslim, or arm themselves up and overtake federal buildings.
C'mon burt.
What the fuck are you talking about? The Left (NOTICE I did NOT say "liberal") really is turning away from free speech, in small but not negligible numbers. This is actually happening. It's equally absurd that the Right is so much in favor of it right now (flag burnings aside).
You've all switched sides and you don't even know it!
They are not in favor of it burt. why are you being so short sighted? Why do you think they elected a president who wants to shut down the press and only gets his news from alex jones?They dont want free speech. They want to hear what makes them feel better and thats it.
The right is not all of a sudden actually more in favor of real free speech. Each side is just more anti-the-other-side's-speech than they usually are. see anti-milo on the left and the attempt to pass laws basically criminalizing peaceful protest coming from GOP statehouses
The Argonaut wrote:The right is not all of a sudden actually more in favor of real free speech. Each side is just more anti-the-other-side's-speech than they usually are. see anti-milo on the left and the attempt to pass laws basically criminalizing peaceful protest coming from GOP statehouses
I'd argue making actual laws prohibiting speech and assembly is a much bigger deal than protesting and getting your way.
