02-04-2017, 02:03 AM
(This post was last modified: 02-04-2017, 02:16 AM by busybee.
Edit Reason: another article
)
I'll volunteer my thoughts as a left millennial.
Milo tests the boundaries of intent for free speech laws regularly. In EU countries he would be over the line. Here's a representative article from the papers:
This is a common alt-righter tactic of presenting someone as a target and drowning it in satire so that it is "just a joke," while greenlighting followers to engage in harassment. The target is not someone previously newsworthy, yet the intent is slanderous. Twitter is rife with campaigns of this sort, conducted primarily online but often involving "doxxing" of persons, including addresses, finances, etc. As with any tight criminal operation, the ringleaders stay in the lines and emerge clean, while the anonymous followers use the information and coordination to do the dirty work. Some of them get arrested in the process, many get away with it.
In essence, the law is being treated as a minor barrier to hate movement goals.
Edit: I just learned of another newspaper article confirming something I had been hearing, which is that at this rally, Milo planned to out undocumented students at Berkeley.
So, now let's talk about what the left and the black bloc are doing in response. The left has followed the right a few years late, perhaps held back by Obama's election, and decided on a counter approach:
Terror tactics force the media to push their best defense of the people and institutions they target, in the usual "fair, balanced, accurate" sense, and in doing so shape the narrative towards allowing a questionable person like Milo, or a major institution like a bank, to be worthy of debate. This lesson was learned, or perhaps re-learned, by Millies in Occupy Wall Street and carried through into the Black Lives Matter protests: Although governments and institutions can always conspire to make them look bad and win the battle in the headlines, and they can target charismatic radical leaders to discredit or disappear them, a story is never complete without the "why did they do it" and the "why" can always be made out to be the thing those same institutions didn't want to discuss: the "1%", the "blue lives", and now the "dapper Neo-Nazi".
As for myself, I will use my free speech to vocally support what they did out there. The nation has remained too silent for too long, and I believe it will come out the stronger for this vigorous struggle.
Milo tests the boundaries of intent for free speech laws regularly. In EU countries he would be over the line. Here's a representative article from the papers:
Quote:In a December talk at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, he disparaged a male-to-female transgender student, showed the student’s picture to the audience on a screen, and said the student’s attempt to change gender identity had failed because “I can still bang him.”
This is a common alt-righter tactic of presenting someone as a target and drowning it in satire so that it is "just a joke," while greenlighting followers to engage in harassment. The target is not someone previously newsworthy, yet the intent is slanderous. Twitter is rife with campaigns of this sort, conducted primarily online but often involving "doxxing" of persons, including addresses, finances, etc. As with any tight criminal operation, the ringleaders stay in the lines and emerge clean, while the anonymous followers use the information and coordination to do the dirty work. Some of them get arrested in the process, many get away with it.
In essence, the law is being treated as a minor barrier to hate movement goals.
Edit: I just learned of another newspaper article confirming something I had been hearing, which is that at this rally, Milo planned to out undocumented students at Berkeley.
So, now let's talk about what the left and the black bloc are doing in response. The left has followed the right a few years late, perhaps held back by Obama's election, and decided on a counter approach:
- No-platform Milo in the literal sense
- By causing an incident, force him into public discussion, thus shining a light on his activities and the movement he is involved in
- Make potential supporters fear for their lives
- Bonus round: Connect the Trump admin to Milo, contributing to the "they sure are fascist" themes that have brought out moderate liberals in number to the strictly peaceful protests
Terror tactics force the media to push their best defense of the people and institutions they target, in the usual "fair, balanced, accurate" sense, and in doing so shape the narrative towards allowing a questionable person like Milo, or a major institution like a bank, to be worthy of debate. This lesson was learned, or perhaps re-learned, by Millies in Occupy Wall Street and carried through into the Black Lives Matter protests: Although governments and institutions can always conspire to make them look bad and win the battle in the headlines, and they can target charismatic radical leaders to discredit or disappear them, a story is never complete without the "why did they do it" and the "why" can always be made out to be the thing those same institutions didn't want to discuss: the "1%", the "blue lives", and now the "dapper Neo-Nazi".
As for myself, I will use my free speech to vocally support what they did out there. The nation has remained too silent for too long, and I believe it will come out the stronger for this vigorous struggle.
