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: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday August 21 2016, @11:27PM
It never meant that. That would be a first amendment violation. Say it with me so you'll understand next time: free speech is not just a first amendment thing, it is a founding American principle.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @02:01AM
Yes a founding principle that they just forgot about at the start and needed an amendment to slip it in later. At least it was kinda more important than owning slaves.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday August 22 2016, @02:22AM
Oooh, yeah, give me that salt. Please. Go right ahead and ignore that we also killed a hell of a lot of white folks to rectify that. What matters is that the founders weren't perfect and thus it's okay to ignore anything they may have gotten absolutely right.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by dry on Monday August 22 2016, @02:33AM
You should really read some history if you think that Free Speech was a founding American principle. Generally during the Revolution, people who spoke against it were tarred and feathered, had their property taken by letters of attainment issued by the colonial governments and later, hung from a tree by Mr Lynch and friends.
The idea that the lower classes, the slaves and the Tories (the right wing party of the day) should have free speech was foreign to the ruling classes.
The founding principles of America are best expressed in a famous document that starts out claiming all men being equal and then goes on to classify some men as 3/5s of a man.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday August 22 2016, @02:40AM
You really should get over slavery. Nobody born in this century's great-grandparents were or owned slaves.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by dry on Monday August 22 2016, @04:08AM
You are the one who brought up "founding principles", not current principles. Speech is one of the rights that has generally become more free with the passing of time. Perhaps eventually we'll get to the point where people aren't thrown in jail for speech.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday August 22 2016, @02:47PM
Has it? Doesn't look that way to me. Forty years ago you could hold most any political view and speak about it on campus without the faculty or administration trying to silence you. Eight years ago you could be a whistleblower and not end up in prison for it. At the beginning of the Internet age you could spout any political view you liked and not get censored as long as you did it in a forum that was somewhat related to what you were saying. Today? All of the above: gone.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @12:10PM
Just because it's made illegal, does not mean it stops happening, if there is demand. Slavery still occurs today, even in the US.
And I don't mean "my employer doesn't pay me enough!" millennial whinging. I mean the real, traditional, old-school your-ass-is-mine kind of slavery. You're not likely to see them though, because modern slaves don't work in the fields.
(Score: 2) by cafebabe on Thursday August 25 2016, @01:10PM
I distinctly remember an episode of Michael Moore's TV Nation which featured slaves. Apparently, they made it legally watertight.
1702845791×2
(Score: 2) by naubol on Monday August 22 2016, @11:04PM
What does it mean? If I have a platform, I'm obligated to let you speak on it? If that's what you mean by 'free speech', I say no thank you.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday August 22 2016, @11:14PM
Absolutely not. It's your platform. If it's a public forum that belongs to you though, just don't be surprised when called on being an oppressive asshat if you're going to be an oppressive asshat. Most especially if you're supposed to fundamentally be about the free and unhindered exchange of ideas, like say a university.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by naubol on Tuesday August 23 2016, @12:00AM
The idea of giving free and unhindered exchange of ideas doesn't strike you as facially absurd? There are so many bad ideas. Should a university give a platform to a flat earther? Universities want to improve the quality of ideas, yes? There must be a selection mechanism and room to get it wrong. As for hindrance, universities are suppose to provide friction for shitty thinking. Hindrance is desirable.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday August 23 2016, @12:40AM
Why would you not give them a platform? Are you afraid of them? Will your own ideas not obviously prove them wrong? Seriously, if you ideas cannot stand debate, it's safe to consider them just flat wrong. This is how universities used to work and how they still should.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by naubol on Tuesday August 23 2016, @11:26AM
signal to noise matters
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday August 23 2016, @01:29PM
No, it absolutely does not. That idea is fascist garbage designed to set those in power up as the ones who decide what qualifies as 'noise' and allows them to both censor something and declare it utterly unworth hearing. You either allow the most absurd ideas or you get fitted for jackboots. There is no middle ground.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by naubol on Tuesday August 30 2016, @11:59AM
Why is there no middle ground?
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday August 30 2016, @12:36PM
Because as soon as there becomes "middle ground" there has to be someone who gets to decide what constitutes speech that can be censored. Since you have to have a human making that decision and humans have an abysmal record of corruption when given power, you cannot give that power to anyone or allow yourself to have it.
Thus our policy here of allowing all speech that isn't mass, commercial spam. Since we are humans, we're open to corruption even here. Thankfully we have widely varied ideologies except on the matter of free speech and someone is always ready to call bullshit on any attempted censorship.
This is not even remotely true on most campuses nowadays. They are fully ready to censor any speech they disagree with.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.