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: 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.