IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 3rd February 2017, 05:27 PM   #561
Puppycow
Penultimate Amazing
 
Puppycow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Yokohama, Japan
Posts: 28,964
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
I disagree. People like Milo and Spencer should not be listened to, and speaking engagements should be protested. Venues should be pressured to remove their appointments and visitors to the events should be pressured and harrassed. This is how we lay bare who's peddling neo-Nazism. That's what we are talking about when we say "better out in the open than hidden away". All of this falls under the first amendment.

What should not be done is committing violence against the audience* or destruction of private property.

* I have no issue with someone socking Spencer or Milo in the face.
Good grief.

First of all, I'll point out that I don't listen to either of them. I don't really know first-hand what their views are other than some second-hand information that gets reported in articles about them.

But first someone has to listen to them to even know that they shouldn't be listened to in the first place. And I am a skeptic, I do my own thinking, reach my own conclusions. I'm not going to take someone else's word for it because I prefer to think for myself. I should not be "pressured and harassed" for exercising my constitutional rights. Protesting is legitimate, "pressuring and harassing" is not, unless you also concede that they should have the right to "pressure and harass" you back. Do you concede that allies of Milo should be allowed to "pressure and harass" people?

Do you concede that they should be allowed to "punch in the face" people they don't like?
__________________
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare
Puppycow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd February 2017, 05:34 PM   #562
Mumbles
Philosopher
 
Mumbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,726
Originally Posted by Eddie Dane View Post
Shapiro is a boring mainstream conservative. He's basically a 1950's dad.
-Finish school
-Save money
-Embryos are people
-Don't have kids till you're married

Those are basically his talking points.

But despite that, I've seen livestream footage of rabid leftie students trying to physically block his audience from reaching his venue, and then locking him and his audience in the venue by keeping the doors locked. Shapiro had to be escorted out the backdoor by security. The audience was locked up and had to wait till the left-winged students got bored and ended their siege.
Heh, I like your description of him. very accurate. And yes, I disagree that he's someone that requires protest and anger - although, again, college kids aren't known for being calm and measured.

Quote:
There is no room for diversity of thought in higher learning institutions and that is very dangerous.
I suspect that this has much less to do with "safe spaces", and much more to do with social media exposing people to the worst of humanity fairly quickly, as well as allowing people to organize rapidly. Shapiro still has a past connection with Breitbart, and that place is a cesspool of misogyny and white supremacy. It should be very easy to whip up anger when he shows up at a college campus, even if he's since walked away from Breitbart.
Mumbles is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd February 2017, 05:38 PM   #563
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 56,422
Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
How about you figure out the difference between illegal and unlawful and try again.
There basically isn't one. Perhaps you were trying to refer to the difference between unlawful and criminal, but I didn't say criminal.

Quote:
The language you're using is not a legal argument
So what? The post I responded to wasn't a legal argument either. But as a matter of fact, "illegal immigrant" is a perfectly accurate description.

Quote:
it's a rhetorical trick to get people to think 'criminal' when they see certain skin colors.
Like I said above, I never said criminal. Nor did I say anything about skin color. And you failed to address my point at all. Why is there a need to grant citizenship to illegal immigrants? There isn't. Even if you think they should be allowed to stay, and even if you think that they shouldn't be left in legal limbo, citizenship isn't the only way to accomplish that. So why citizenship and not legal residency? You haven't said. In fact, you've pretended that my post didn't even raise that question. Instead, you yourself merely resort to the rhetorical trick of insinuating I'm a racist, because you have no counter-argument.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd February 2017, 05:58 PM   #564
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 17,528
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
Fails to adequately support?
Yes. Once it was revealed your original citation was 200 proof crap, your second citation -- a big step forward -- showed that university officials were concerned Milo was trying to have students deported. There is no evidence, however, that the concern was founded in fact.

Quote:
What violence?
I realize you're operating from an alt dictionary, which I'm disinterested in debating against.

Quote:
What would that have achieved?
This is an incredibly complex concept. You may need to concentrate on the nuance:

Operating under your claim that undocumented attendees were at risk if they attended the event, if they were to be warned before they entered the venue, the risk would be mitigated. I know, it's hard to wrap one's mind around a tactic with this depth of complexity.
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.
varwoche is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd February 2017, 06:00 PM   #565
Puppycow
Penultimate Amazing
 
Puppycow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Yokohama, Japan
Posts: 28,964
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
Here he is telling an audience why he postponed his planned speech about pizzagate.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
I imagine the purpose of this speech was to explain that pizzagate was fake news. Right?

It's rather stunning that a lying conspiracy theorist such as Milo is held in such high esteem. Welcome to Trump alt-reality folks.

(Dangit, I was trumped by Resume)
Maybe him and Alex Jones both realized how ridiculous it is and decided he didn't want to embarrass himself?

http://ibankcoin.com/zeropointnow/20...nternet-abuzz/
__________________
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare
Puppycow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd February 2017, 06:01 PM   #566
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 60,375
If Milo was trying using his meetings to trap illegal aliens for deportation, it was one hell of a inefficient way to go about it.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd February 2017, 06:01 PM   #567
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 8,143
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
This is an incredibly complex concept. You may need to concentrate on the nuance:

Operating under your claim that undocumented attendees were at risk if they attended the event, if they were to be warned before they entered the venue, the risk would be mitigated. I know, it's hard to wrap one's mind around a tactic with this depth of complexity.
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd February 2017, 06:03 PM   #568
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 8,143
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
If Milo was trying using his meetings to trap illegal aliens for deportation, it was one hell of a inefficient way to go about it.
What makes you think he was trying to trap them? Why would undocumented people show up to attend an alt-right event?
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd February 2017, 06:03 PM   #569
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 60,375
Originally Posted by Puppycow View Post
Maybe him and Alex Jones both realized how ridiculous it is and decided he didn't want to embarrass himself?

http://ibankcoin.com/zeropointnow/20...nternet-abuzz/
Jesus, I thought Alex Jones was incapable of embarrassing himself.....
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd February 2017, 06:05 PM   #570
Graham2001
Graduate Poster
 
Graham2001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,697
Found a long video (1:33:08) on the CFI YouTube channel which is of a lecture by Dave Rubin, Christina Hoff Sommers, and Peter Boghossian at Portland University on Free Speech.

What is really interesting about it is the kind of videos that YouTube throws up as recommendeds.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8kJ3SKiDj8

One of those videos was from the Portland University Student Newspaper, I clicked through to that video and found that the video linked above was not visible as a recommended, I find this kind of auto-censorship interesting. The Second video is below, look at their recommended list and compare with the first videos recommended list.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHFLgwoVR7o
__________________
"I need hard facts! Bring in the dowsers!"
'America Unearthed' Season 1, Episode 13: Hunt for the Holy Grail

Everybody gets it wrong sometimes...
Graham2001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd February 2017, 06:09 PM   #571
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 96,386
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
I think in a way this blatant hypocrisy all around is hilarious. I'm a big believer in free speech and think I'm a hypocrite when I want this ******* to shut it, but I also find it like being tolerant of Islam. Why should I be tolerant of people professing ideas that aren't the least bit tolerant and wouldn't hesitate to take away my fee speech?
It's one thing to accept that Fred Phelps can get on his soapbox on a street corner. It's quite another to expect no one to counter protest if the extracurricular Christian Club invites him to share his views on campus.

Free speech applies to counter protests as well.

Some people are just out to see how vile they can get away with and when they don't get away with it, they complain about being shut down because ... unfair.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd February 2017, 06:14 PM   #572
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 17,528
caveman1917.v1 ...
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
Milo was planning at his gathering to out undocumented students. These students could get into trouble with immigration authorities and possibly have to stop their education at UC Berkeley or even be deported...
Meet caveman1917.v2 ...
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
What makes you think he was trying to trap them? Why would undocumented people show up to attend an alt-right event?
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.
varwoche is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd February 2017, 06:14 PM   #573
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
TLA Dictator
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 41,468
Originally Posted by sunmaster14 View Post
That's ridiculous. There isn't a progressive pundit around who could hold a candle to Milo in a debate. He's a deeper thinker than any of them. Far more articulate. And funny as hell. He may be a troll part of the time (much of the time actually), but he's certainly not a paint-by-numbers troll.
Haw haw haw! I remember when "There's not a Dem/Liberal/Progressive around who could take Bill Buckley in a debate",.... just before Gore Vidal ripped him apart. How about "Oh, swift! O'Reilly is going to destroy anyone on the other side, he's Bill O'Reilly, man!"..... as Jon Stewart shredded him and his network in their staged debate.

You really think a guy with a mic and a prepared speech and no opposition is going to be a good debater? Milo is probably going to be doing E! Red Carpet Reports in three years. He's an attention whore. John Oliver, Colbert, Stewart? Hell, he couldn't even handle Joe Rogan. Even in a "friendly mic" show, he broke even in their tussle, at best. The big guns? They'd destroy him in a debate.

I find it curious that you feel that a person of such aberrant thinking is "deep". I'd qualify him as "confusing/confused".
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable.
Foolmewunz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd February 2017, 06:24 PM   #574
Noztradamus
Illuminator
 
Noztradamus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,680
Originally Posted by Mumbles View Post
That sounds like The Douchiest Show on Earth.



I've said before that far too many people see "racist" as an insult, when it's really a description. This may be true of "homophobe" as well. Having a single, obviously hateful, gay guy on staff won't help them in the slightest.
Yep. just like ******
__________________
The Australian Family Association's John Morrissey was aghast when he learned Jessica Watson was bidding to become the youngest person to sail round the world alone, unaided and without stopping.
Noztradamus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd February 2017, 06:25 PM   #575
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 8,143
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
caveman1917.v1 ...


Meet caveman1917.v2 ...
You do understand the difference between "outing" and "trapping" right?
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd February 2017, 06:33 PM   #576
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 17,528
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
You do understand the difference between "outing" and "trapping" right?
I so knew that was coming. I almost added it as a spoiler to my post.
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.
varwoche is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd February 2017, 06:45 PM   #577
phiwum
Penultimate Amazing
 
phiwum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 13,384
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
Never would you consider that perhaps the things you can _can_ be refuted and that this has nothing to do with someone's hypothetical finding of you as a jerk?



Hopefully moderates on both sides will.
I agree. Protesting his speech is okay, violence that prevents his speech is not.
phiwum is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd February 2017, 07:00 PM   #578
Delphic Oracle
Philosopher
 
Delphic Oracle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 6,415
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
There basically isn't one. Perhaps you were trying to refer to the difference between unlawful and criminal, but I didn't say criminal.



So what? The post I responded to wasn't a legal argument either. But as a matter of fact, "illegal immigrant" is a perfectly accurate description.
Only if you accept the idea that a person can be illegal. I find that concept terrifying in the extreme. Behaviors are illegal. A person is violating the law by being unlawfully present, not for 'being' illegal. If we can craft laws declaring people illegal, we're in deep ****.

Quote:
Like I said above, I never said criminal. Nor did I say anything about skin color. And you failed to address my point at all. Why is there a need to grant citizenship to illegal immigrants? There isn't. Even if you think they should be allowed to stay, and even if you think that they shouldn't be left in legal limbo, citizenship isn't the only way to accomplish that. So why citizenship and not legal residency? You haven't said. In fact, you've pretended that my post didn't even raise that question. Instead, you yourself merely resort to the rhetorical trick of insinuating I'm a racist, because you have no counter-argument.
I know you didn't say criminal. The words you're using twist criminal and certain superficial traits together. Even if you personally don't believe that, parroting that phrasing keeps the message going. So you can unintentionally aid it even if you aren't.

Yeesh.

Last edited by Delphic Oracle; 3rd February 2017 at 07:01 PM.
Delphic Oracle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd February 2017, 07:00 PM   #579
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
TLA Dictator
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 41,468
Originally Posted by sir drinks-a-lot View Post
Here is ~15 minutes of Jon Stewart claiming he's just a comedian. He does this so often, it's referred to his "clown nose on, clown nose off" schtick.
"He does this so often" 'cuz right wing (unintentional) clowns like Tucker don't get it. The only way the mainstream suck-ups can justify their own horrid excuse for journalism is to point out that a comedian on a comedy show on COMEDY CENTRAL wasn't tough enough in his questioning?

So, yeah... he's making a valid point that Counterpoint and numerous other shows are staging an entertainment extravaganza and not pursuing honest debate. They're looking for sound bytes and ratings, and their best defense is "I know you are but what am I?" O'Reilly did it, Hannity did it, Carlson did it. As Stewart noted.... the network is called COMEDY Central and his lead-in show was puppets making crank phone calls. Fox is the Fox NEWS Network. CNN is "NEWS". It would be like having Will Smith on and criticizing him because the Fresh Prince never really criticized black-on-black crime.
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable.
Foolmewunz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd February 2017, 07:08 PM   #580
rdwight
Graduate Poster
 
rdwight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 1,011
Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
Officer safety has to be #1 because if an officer goes down you've got an officer to extract and less resources to do it with, plus the base problem you already had.

$100,000 damage vs. $100,000 and injured or slain officers.

Which is worse?
Don't think those are the only possible outcomes. Just my opinion but it would seem like there is middle ground from those outcomes and other more optimistic ones. As well as the possibility that inaction could cause civilian injuries or deaths.

Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
The flaw in your thinking seems to be that the police escalation will go swimmingly. Almost as if there's a direct correlation between police responsiveness and resulting damage. It's not that simple.
I have been upfront that I am no expert in crowd dispersion/riot protocol but from your experience you have obviously seen different outcomes to different tactics used by police in these situations. Is non-intervention always the best method? And could a better planned police response before an event happens be a contributing factor?

I seem to be on the side that inaction and bad planning can cause more issues, while you seem to be of the view that police action to intervene could cause more trouble than it would solve. I don't think either of us are necessarily right or wrong since it would depend on the situation, but hopefully places that these actions are common place at can take a second look to see if policies that are in place are as good as they can be.

Don't think it something that requires federal funds being withheld to solve, but it doesn't mean they shouldn't question if there is anything that could be done better.
rdwight is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd February 2017, 09:55 PM   #581
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 69,914
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
It's one thing to accept that Fred Phelps can get on his soapbox on a street corner. It's quite another to expect no one to counter protest if the extracurricular Christian Club invites him to share his views on campus.

Free speech applies to counter protests as well.

Some people are just out to see how vile they can get away with and when they don't get away with it, they complain about being shut down because ... unfair. : rolleyes :
Counter protests are awesome. I love counter protests. I bet Milo does too. The more speech, the better.

But we're not talking about counter protests, here. We're talking about a violent and destructive rampage. We're talking about the use of violence to suppress speech. That's the vile **** you're defending here.
__________________
There is no Antimemetics Division.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd February 2017, 10:16 PM   #582
Noztradamus
Illuminator
 
Noztradamus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,680
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
What makes you think he was trying to trap them? Why would undocumented people show up to attend an alt-right event?
It's your weird fantasy. You explain. no don't try.
__________________
The Australian Family Association's John Morrissey was aghast when he learned Jessica Watson was bidding to become the youngest person to sail round the world alone, unaided and without stopping.
Noztradamus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd February 2017, 10:16 PM   #583
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 56,422
Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
Only if you accept the idea that a person can be illegal.
You're trying to engage in a meaningless semantic squabble in order to ignore the real point. The only semantic objection I will accept is that technically I should say "illegal alien", since that is the statutorily defined term. But both "illegal immigrant" and "illegal alien" have a well-established meaning, you were not confused by my meaning, and your politically correct objection has no bearing on my argument. Either address my actual point, or find someone else to whine to, because I simply don't care.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd February 2017, 11:46 PM   #584
Delphic Oracle
Philosopher
 
Delphic Oracle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 6,415
Originally Posted by rdwight View Post
Don't think those are the only possible outcomes. Just my opinion but it would seem like there is middle ground from those outcomes and other more optimistic ones. As well as the possibility that inaction could cause civilian injuries or deaths.



I have been upfront that I am no expert in crowd dispersion/riot protocol but from your experience you have obviously seen different outcomes to different tactics used by police in these situations. Is non-intervention always the best method? And could a better planned police response before an event happens be a contributing factor?

I seem to be on the side that inaction and bad planning can cause more issues, while you seem to be of the view that police action to intervene could cause more trouble than it would solve. I don't think either of us are necessarily right or wrong since it would depend on the situation, but hopefully places that these actions are common place at can take a second look to see if policies that are in place are as good as they can be.

Don't think it something that requires federal funds being withheld to solve, but it doesn't mean they shouldn't question if there is anything that could be done better.
Well, I'm speaking to the scale we saw at UCB.

I would call that a destructive protest.

We're in a time of constant hyperbolic language and people call anything that gets more contentious than a candlelight vigil a riot. I'm not endorsing destructive protest, but it is still a bit of a ways from a riot.

Think of a scale of civil action escalation

Meetings held publicly for discussion
Presence at a place of significance to an issue
Flash mob type public performance or spectacle, usually satirical ridicule
March through neighborhoods to increase visibility
Disruptive actions to gain the attention of an institution (hard bargaining)

That last one is about where it gets grey for me. It has to be on the table or there's never going to be any bargaining with that powerful institution at all. It is a direct representation of how many people will put their bodies in the way of something that is past their limit of fundamentally wrong to them. How many people will take the time to get arrested, get processed, get a lawyer, pay the fine, and so on. It is essentially a form of combat without the body count.

Especially in the case of business interests being hampered over a social issue, unless the business interest in question is run by people with an ideological stake. They'll be calling their purchased politicians and telling them to knock off their social engineering ASAP. The police departments are spending money like crazy watching these actions and arresting people (boots=money). Now the city council is mad. The court may get your fine, but they've got a judge, prosecutor, paralegal staff, and a correctional division, time is money yet again. This is how you push power around.

Everything past this is beyond what I would consider justified (or effective). These acts go beyond decency or civility for someone's sense of moral affront to justify.

Hostility and intimidation towards dissenters
Property destruction and assault
Looting and rioting
Threats and acts of targeted destruction
Assassinations
Open revolt

So there's an escalation gradient appropriate to those on the other side. You'd hardly want rubber bullets and tear gas for the women's march that took place. The police looked like they were expecting the hostility/intimidation level and it went a few notches higher than they anticipated into the destructive level. So they contain the issue and focus on preventing people from getting hurt. Meanwhile resources are mounting at the same time the ones committing destructive acts are exhausting themselves in their frenzy. Once the resources arrive, the crowd is more weary, easier to chase down, putting up less of a struggle. It basically comes down to who's burning more calories if you want to look at it that way.

I won't deny they got caught flat-footed, but I don't they they were intentionally lax. It's the same thing we see with championship victories that go overboard. Most cops are decent people, they want people to be safe and alive, so they focus first on removing people not involved who might get hurt. People get tired, need to pee, get hungry, that moves body signals from amped to anxious, which means feet lead the body elsewhere. Police watch and study who the problem people are, start making moves when they are isolated, all the same stuff.

Last edited by Delphic Oracle; 4th February 2017 at 12:32 AM.
Delphic Oracle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2017, 03:44 AM   #585
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 8,143
Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
$100,000 damage vs. $100,000 and injured or slain officers.

Which is worse?
The former.
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2017, 03:53 AM   #586
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
Only if you accept the idea that a person can be illegal. I find that concept terrifying in the extreme. Behaviors are illegal.
Oh, come on, Oracle. You know exactly what he meant.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2017, 03:57 AM   #587
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 8,143
Originally Posted by Noztradamus View Post
It's your weird fantasy.
No it isn't, it's just something you and varwoche made up, in an apparent attempt to divert from varwoche's failure to argue their case.
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2017, 04:35 AM   #588
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 8,143
Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
I agree. Protesting his speech is okay, violence that prevents his speech is not.
Same questions:

-Which violence?

-How many undocumented people being outed is such an event worth to you?

-What if it were a town under Nazi occupation and someone wanted to hold a public speech to the SS telling them where the Jews are hiding?
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2017, 06:05 AM   #589
wareyin
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 11,828
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
I so knew that was coming. I almost added it as a spoiler to my post.
Not to defend the dubious claim, but I think that Milo could "out" people who were not actually attending his speech. Even if John Smith were not in attendance, announcing on stage to (presumably) his peers that John Smith was an illegal alien would still be outing him. I don't see how warning people before they enter the venue would actually prevent Milo from outing anyone.
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2017, 06:19 AM   #590
Sherkeu
Illuminator
 
Sherkeu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Disneyland
Posts: 3,414
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
Same questions:

-Which violence?

-How many undocumented people being outed is such an event worth to you?

-What if it were a town under Nazi occupation and someone wanted to hold a public speech to the SS telling them where the Jews are hiding?
The students brought here as children have DACA permits, SS numbers, are legally entitled to work, and pay 1/3 what foreign students pay because they are considered legal residents of California (just not legal immigrants). According to Berkeley requirements, they should all have filed (or will soon file) for legal immigration status. There is an office on every campus to help specifically with these issue of protection and privacy. No one is coming to deport them!

However, there are people who feel the obligation to attack them, personally, saying they are taking seats away from citizens. These are ignorant asshats who cause them unwarranted anxiety and fear. It's a good reason not to be so public about their immigration status to avoid potential harassment. But asshats cannot deport anyone.

The fear has been that Trump would rescind DACA (which was an executive order). But he indicated that these students should not suffer for their parents actions and has no plans to demote their status. He will probably replace Obamas order just to Trump him (ie. will give them green cards before graduating to improve employment opportunities, but with serious vetting for criminals and a faster track for good grades).

That said, any undocumented student with criminal convictions may have real cause to worry.
Sherkeu is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2017, 06:37 AM   #591
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 69,914
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
Not to defend the dubious claim, but I think that Milo could "out" people who were not actually attending his speech. Even if John Smith were not in attendance, announcing on stage to (presumably) his peers that John Smith was an illegal alien would still be outing him. I don't see how warning people before they enter the venue would actually prevent Milo from outing anyone.
On the other hand, Milo doesn't have to be there to out John Smith, either. Protesting then speech doesn't stop him from outing people on social media and letting his followers take it viral on campus.
__________________
There is no Antimemetics Division.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2017, 06:42 AM   #592
Sherkeu
Illuminator
 
Sherkeu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Disneyland
Posts: 3,414
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
Anyone else see the death threat in here? Insane.

Quote:
We have less reason than ever to behave ourselves or rely on liberal solutions. Right now, anarchists remain a small minority. But if society continues polarizing — if people recognize that the only way to defend themselves against you and the puppeteers who pull your strings is to take direct action — then there may be a lot more people alongside us soon.

It might even be too many for the authorities to control — just like it was in Berkeley.

And if that happens, the daddy state won’t be able to protect you.
Sherkeu is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2017, 07:49 AM   #593
Joe Random
Illuminator
 
Joe Random's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,083
And on the other coast, someone at NYU is ... concerned about Gavin McInnes. And she's a professor. (edit to add - NSFW language warning)

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE



"Nazi" has now officially joined "racist", "sexist", and "misogynist" on the list of words which used to actually mean something specific (and terrible), but now simply translate as "you're a bad man and I don't like you". Ironically, from what little I know of him, McInnes is someone who could legitimately be called a sexist or transphobic. But instead we go to the Nazi well yet again as le mot du jour.

Last edited by Joe Random; 4th February 2017 at 07:51 AM.
Joe Random is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2017, 07:55 AM   #594
Stacko
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,837
Marquette County Republican Party Secretary Dan Adamimi has an idea to deal with this.

Stacko is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2017, 07:58 AM   #595
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 69,914
Originally Posted by Stacko View Post
Marquette County Republican Party Secretary Dan Adamimi has an idea to deal with this.

That's awful.
__________________
There is no Antimemetics Division.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2017, 08:17 AM   #596
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 17,528
Poor Dan, lacking a self-awareness gene, has taken flack for proposing that protesters be killed:

Originally Posted by Dan Adamimi
About to go on the air, lots of hate coming from the tolerant left
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.
varwoche is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2017, 08:18 AM   #597
Resume
Troublesome Passenger
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 21,844
Originally Posted by Stacko View Post
Marquette County Republican Party Secretary Dan Adamimi has an idea to deal with this.

Scumbag.
__________________
Like as the waves make towards the pebbled shore,
So do our minutes hasten to their end . . .


WS
Resume is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2017, 08:26 AM   #598
sunmaster14
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 10,017
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
Poor Dan, lacking a self-awareness gene, has taken flack for proposing that protesters be killed:
Flak. Flack is something else.
sunmaster14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2017, 09:59 AM   #599
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 17,528
Berkeley, the birthplace of the free speech movement (and of me).

Sad! as they say.


Originally Posted by sunmaster14 View Post
Flak. Flack is something else.
Whaddya know, thanks.
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.
varwoche is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2017, 10:24 AM   #600
sunmaster14
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 10,017
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
Berkeley, the birthplace of the free speech movement (and of me).
Berkeley is not the birthplace of the free speech movement. It is the birthplace of the "Free Speech Movement" which was intentionally misnamed:

Quote:
Do you want to know where the birthplace of the free-speech movement was? Well nobody knows for sure, but I have some guesses. It might have been ancient Athens. Or it might have been Jerusalem or Bethlehem. Or maybe it was London where, in 1689, the English Bill of Rights established a constitutional right to free speech for Parliament. Or maybe it was Philadelphia in 1776 or 1789.
I can make arguments for all of these places as birthplaces for the free-speech movement. You know where I can’t make that argument? Mother-[expletive deleted]ing Berkeley in 1964.


Quote:
Whaddya know, thanks.
You're most welcome!
sunmaster14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:02 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.