SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
In a rather well-timed yet coincidental counterpoint to Why we're Losing the Internet to the Culture of Hate, Milo Yiannopoulos over at Breitbart brings us this:
A warped currency today governs popular culture. Instead of creativity, talent and boldness, those who succeed are often those who can best demonstrate outrage, grievance and victimhood.
Even conservatives are buying into it. Witness, in the days since Breitbart executive chairman Stephen K. Bannon was announced as Donald Trump's campaign manager, how establishment stooges have bought into the worst smear-tactics of the left. As with the left, nothing is evaluated on its quality, or whether it's factually accurate, thought-provoking or even amusing: only whether it can be deemed sexist, racist or homophobic.
Campuses are where the illness takes its most severe form. Students running for safe spaces at the slightest hint of a challenge to their coddled worldview. Faculties and administrations desperately trying to sabotage visits from conservative speakers (often me!) to avoid the inevitable complaints from tearful lefty students.
In this maelstrom of grievance, there is one group boldly swimming against the tide: trolls.
Trolling has become a byword for everything the left disagrees with, particularly if it's boisterous, mischievous and provocative. Even straightforward political disagreement, not intended to provoke, is sometimes described as "trolling" by leftists who can't tell the difference between someone who doesn't believe as they do and an "abuser" or "harasser."
Yeah, you knew I wouldn't let that kinda SJW nonsense slide without comment.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Arik on Sunday August 21 2016, @12:38PM
There's no excuse at all to go in, insist on your 3 seats, then sit there and pump your arms back and forth like logs going down a waterfall while spouting slogans and obscenities at the top of your voice to prevent him from speaking. Not only is there no excuse for that behaviour, but it is the occurrence of such behaviour itself which demonstrates, ex post facto, the need for Milo to have appeared.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @03:09PM
> There's no excuse at all to go in, insist on your 3 seats, then sit there and pump your arms back and
> forth like logs going down a waterfall while spouting slogans and obscenities
Never? Under no circumstances should a speaker be shouted down in protest?
Are you really willing to commit to that? Think carefully.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @04:33PM
What possible circumstances can you envisage under which shouting down a speaker is the best available option? When is there ever a perfect opportunity for that one time to shout down a speaker, when that will make things affirmatively better? Even if you complaint is purely a noise or public nuisance issue, how is shouting the speaker down making it better?
If you take it to prepared, invited speakers on university campus (the case under discussion here) how does tolerating manifest mass bigotry on the part of the audience making it better, as opposed to carefully documenting, analysing and critiquing the speech?
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:53PM
> What possible circumstances can you envisage under which shouting down a speaker is the best available option?
Who said anything about "the best available option?" It is, however, a legitimate option.
If you believe in absolute freedom of speech then you can not deny the right of someone to speak any time they want to, even if that means speaking at the same time as you and speaking louder than you.
If you don't agree with those things, then you do not believe in absolute freedom of speech and that point we are just negotiating on where the line actually is.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @08:16PM
Yes yes yes, being opposed to censorship is just denying someone else their right to free speech (and advocate for censorship).
Except one of these instances leads to increased speech while the other does not.
What a facile argument.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @08:50PM
How is speaking louder than someone else censorship?
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @09:07PM
Nice change of focus. It's not shouting louder as if through a heated exchange, but shouting down to where another party can't hear what the other person is saying at all.
That is censorship.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @02:20AM
> Nice change of focus. It's not shouting louder as if through a heated exchange
So what?
Seriously, who says that speech is only speech if you pause so the other guy can get a word in edgewise?
If someone wants to speak uninterrupted go do it in private. But if you want to speak in public then either you accept some limitations on speech or you accept that some people will speak much, much louder than you.
You are suffering from the cognitive dissonance of trying to be a free speech absolutist but not going all the way.
Either you are all in or you are not.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday August 21 2016, @04:52PM
No, never. Under no circumstances. If you have something to say, do it without infringing on anyone else's right to say their own piece.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:48PM
> No, never. Under no circumstances. If you have something to say, do it without infringing on anyone else's right to say their own piece.
Got it.
Buzzard supports the right of nazis, nambla and isis to spread their propaganda using student tuition fees without any interference from the people paying those fees.
He welcomes rallies that advocate for the imprisonment, torture and killing of anyone that looks like him.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:58PM
Yes, I absolutely do.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @06:01PM
How'd that work out for your ancestors?
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday August 21 2016, @11:18PM
What, you mean being able to speak their mind freely? Worked out fine until recently when the libtard fuckwads decided free speech was only for them.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @02:17AM
Look at buzzard pretending the trail of tears didn't happen.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday August 22 2016, @02:24AM
My ancestors were warriors. They may have died but at least they didn't whine about it.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @04:08AM
> My ancestors were warriors. They may have died but at least they didn't whine about it.
True or not, its a non-sequitor.
They are dead because speech convinced the us government that killing them - men, women, children - for their land was perfectly OK.
Haven't you ever wondered why free speech is so important? What's the point?
So what if a bunch of people talk to each other or not. What difference does it make?
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday August 22 2016, @02:41PM
No, I have never wondered why free speech is important. It's been self-evident ever since I can remember.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @04:50AM
Did you just say that the people who were force marched off their land and themselves chose to call that forced march "The Trail of Tears and Death" did not whine about it?
They didn't name it "The Happy Fun Trail" did they? I'm pretty sure those weren't tears of joy, they literally named it for the act of crying.
Just how deep is your denial buzzard?
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday August 22 2016, @02:35PM
Walk a thousand miles, you're entitled to bitch that your feet hurt a time or two. What you're not entitled to do is bitch that an ancestor you never met and no living family member remembers had a hard time of it. That's called being an entitled, whiny, little bitch.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1) by Ethanol-fueled on Sunday August 21 2016, @08:20PM
The way I like to present that point of view to liberals is to suggest that Trump will become president and then it will be they who will be marginalized and up against the wall; and that's why all people must stand for even speech they find repugnant.
Suppose that Trump does win, and the present militant form of "political correctness," becomes as undesirable as racism and sexism are now - if those people had formerly stood for free speech, then there would be little or no backlash. One of the best windfalls of a Trump victory would be to see the swift backlash against the P.C. mass-insanity that's been plaguing America for the past 8-ish years.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by aristarchus on Sunday August 21 2016, @10:39PM
Absolutely? "Only Sith and Buzzards deal in absolutes." Qui Gon Jinn, Jedi Master.
The issue is not about free speech. It is about being an ass. And technically, being an ass means having no sensitivity to context.
An instance: Once upon a time, a German University invited an American Philosophy professor to give a talk. Students occupied the lecture hall, blocked access, and the professor was not able to speak. Censorship? Maybe. But context means that details matter.
The professor was Peter Singer, a well-known advocate of animal rights, and proponent of Utilitarianism. His talk was to be making an argument for euthanasia for those born with severe defects, with the idea it would be cruel to prolong a life that held no prospect for happiness, and only promised more pain. With provisos, philosophically this in an argument an ethicist could make. So why did the students shut him down?
Germany. The policy of eugenics did not only mean the termination of Jews, Gypsies, Homosexuals and Communists, it practiced the killing of the mentally or physically deformed as well. There is a great scene in "Life is Beautiful", where a mother is complaining about a homework problem given to her child, calculating the cost of keeping a developmentally retarded person alive versus terminating them: "How they can expect a child to do math this complicated!" For Singer to attempt to give a talk on this topic, in post-Nazi Germany, bespeaks a complete lack of understanding of context. Political Correctness? Damn right, you do not give a speech like this in Germany, it is too soon, and many never not be.
Of course Singer complained, accusing German students of not having sufficiently learned the value of free speech in academia. I was just wondering why he was such an ass.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday August 21 2016, @11:20PM
Ar, you're your own contradiction. Without free speech, you couldn't say such foolish shit.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Sunday August 21 2016, @11:42PM
Ha ha, Buzz! Made you listen! Be more careful in the future.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday August 21 2016, @11:49PM
Well, you know, I was going through all my replies and you were in there, so I thought what the hell...
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @11:43AM
So because a philosophical argument made some Germans uncomfortable, they took it on themselves to decide that nobody should be allowed to hear the argument?
Yeah, Germany is full of authoritarian assholes. Some things never change.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by aristarchus on Tuesday August 23 2016, @08:32AM
So because a philosophical argument made some Germans uncomfortable,
Just don't get it, do we? No, not a matter of discomfort. A matter of moral responsibility. Germans are better at this than Americans, though at great cost. They are ashamed at having accepted such arguments in the past, and now will not stand to have anyone make the same argument again, having seen first hand where it goes. Context, ass. Or as realtors say, location, location, location. We see your location, ass.
(Score: 2) by wisnoskij on Tuesday August 23 2016, @12:42PM
Germany, it is too soon, and many never not be.
So the feelings of a bunch of teens, who have never had anything bad happen to them, are more important than humans rights and correct medical care for the most vulnerable demographics?
I am sorry, but fuck you. This is the same thinking that the Nazi's used to dismiss this same societal group to unimportance. Feelings never trump Human Rights, I would not change that opinion even if the coddled teens were replaced with Holocaust survivors.
(Score: 4, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:58PM
No, never. Under no circumstances. If you have something to say, do it without infringing on anyone else's right to say their own piece.
In other words: "I want people to obey only the social constraints that I think are important. As my bud Milo says, trolls should have free rein to disrupt, harass, and annoy to whatever degree they want, and we should encourage them! But don't let them shout my favorite speaker down! No! Milo needs a safe space to talk. And you should sit down, be a good boy, and listen quietly to his rant about how you should go out and disrupt social norms elsewhere!"
(Score: 2, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday August 21 2016, @11:16PM
No, in other words, college is billed as a place where you can openly exchange differing ideas but lately it's been exactly the opposite and this needs pointed out.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 5, Touché) by AthanasiusKircher on Sunday August 21 2016, @04:55PM
There's no excuse at all to go in, insist on your 3 seats, then sit there and pump your arms back and forth like logs going down a waterfall while spouting slogans and obscenities at the top of your voice to prevent him from speaking. Not only is there no excuse for that behaviour, but it is the occurrence of such behaviour itself which demonstrates, ex post facto, the need for Milo to have appeared.
I agree with you that such behavior is impolite and uncivil (and I personally would just avoid a talk I wasn't interested in rather that disrupting it).
HOWEVER, I find it profoundly ironic for you to say "there is no excuse for that behavior" in a thread discussing the author's opinion that TROLLS will "save the world." If he truly believes that trolls are this tremendous force of good, why precisely is there "no excuse" for trolling one of his talks in person?? Shouldn't you be celebrating the audience member's choice to enact Mr. Yiannopoulos's lauded mode of discourse?
Or is trolling only good when you agree with the opinion of the trolls?
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday August 21 2016, @04:57PM
Trolling, typically done in an online medium, does not stop anyone else from speaking. There is your difference.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by AthanasiusKircher on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:12PM
Trolling, typically done in an online medium, does not stop anyone else from speaking. There is your difference.
In the grandparent's scenario, did the protester run up on stage and gag Mr. Yiannopoulos? If not, then the protester is NOT "stopping anyone else from speaking." They are merely speaking in a distracting and disruptive way, just as online trolls tend to do.
In an online comment thread, trolls can frequently drown out the voices of reason if they want to. I've seen plenty of online discussion forums overrun by trollish comments, where it becomes impossible to find the few legitimate reasoned comments. What's your difference again?
(Again -- I am NOT advocating for people to behave in such a manner, whether on comment threads or at speeches.)
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:18PM
They have typically made enough noise that nobody could hear him. See any of the numerous situations where their "rebuttal" was air horns.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by AthanasiusKircher on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:39PM
They have typically made enough noise that nobody could hear him. See any of the numerous situations where their "rebuttal" was air horns.
So?? Now you're trying to make a distinction based on degree, not on morality of action.
The facts are thus: (1) Most people like to claim we live in a civilized society. (2) Civilized society has various rules and conventions for "polite" behavior in various contexts. (3) Reasoned discourse involves various conventions, which as you rightly point out, varies by the capabilities of the medium. (4) Trolls, pretty much by definition, are people who refuse to adhere to such conventions for reasoned discourse. They create disruptions and distractions that undermine the social conventions which allow reasoned discourse to proceed smoothly.
Mr. Yiannopoulos here argues in favor of the trolls. His opinion piece makes no distinctions of "degree" for acceptable disruption, as you attempt to do here. If he did, I'd happily side with your distinction. But instead, Mr. Yiannopoulos explicitly encourages those on campus with "their thick skins and their contempt for social norms" to act.
And they are. Just some of them are acting against him. Perhaps Mr. Yiannopoulos should take his own advice: "Trolls lose interest when their targets stop taking themselves so seriously." He clearly thinks of himself as deserving of a place of honor, a "safe space" for him to talk aloud for an extended period without interruption. He wants to be "special." Well, perhaps if he wants to avoid the trolls, he needs to give up this idea that he is so deserving of special treatment. He needs to stop taking himself "so seriously." That might involve giving up speaking gigs, though.
OR, maybe he could adopt a more rational worldview in favor of reasoned discourse rather than anarchy and the sowing of discord. In which case, I'd gladly agree with you that the protesters are acting wrongly. For now, he's clearly getting precisely what he's asking for.
(Score: 3, Informative) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:58PM
Degree? I make the distinction on silencing of speech vs disagreeing. Period.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @11:52PM
Let's translate: I don't like the politics you do and can't come up with a good reason why, so let's split hairs on the finest details of your position until you give up from frustration!
(Score: 2) by Arik on Monday August 22 2016, @12:21PM
They do not troll him - frankly I think he would welcome it if they did! but they do not. Straight out DOS attacks, just screaming nonsense and blowing airhorns to make it impossible for the audience to hear him. That is not trolling anyone, that's just being a jerk.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?