Published response to "reconfiguration of LDS politics"

[Scott Lloyd]

8 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

I think the problem is that there weren't many peaceful protests.

Peaceful protests have never been at issue. I never would have brought up Berkeley if the protest had been peaceful. It was a riot, really. And subsequent threats.

 

[Gray]

20 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

He publicly resigned from that publication because it was becoming alt-right and embracing Trump. He then faced worse persecution by the alt-right than nearly any other journalist. He's an orthodox Jew and faced ridiculous levels of anti-semitism. The idea floated by some (not just you -- it even turned up on NPR) that he's alt-right is ridiculous. Again I may disagree with some of his views. However saying it's part of the alt-right when arguably he was one of the biggest victims during the Trump campaign takes some gumption. He's faced countless threats of violence by the alt-right.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/gist/2016/11/ben_shapiro_on_steve_bannon_the_alt_right_and_why_the_left_needs_to_turn.html

"I mentioned earlier this Anti-Defamation League study that said that I was the No. 1 target of anti-Semitism in the journalistic world this year."

He at least rejects the anti-antisemitism of the alt right, but their focus tends to be more on immigrants in general, Muslims and Hispanics in particular, and of course black people. 

But based on his comments he's still an extremist and a nut. Anyone who paints everyone on the other side (liberals or conservatives) as "nasty" "pathetic" and "evil" has to have a screw loose. 

 

 

 

[RevTestament]

1 hour ago, Rajah Manchou said:

This is the comment form the Hancock article that came to mind when you mentioned Berkeley:

"No matter how unpopular such “[cultural] wars” may be in certain circles, Latter-day Saints could never abandon the Christian responsibility to resist the emerging ethic of sexual expression and gender-identity entitlement that often threatens to prevail at the expense of society’s immense interest in fostering stable families. And it’s also worth noting that there would never be so-called “culture wars” if progressives had not assiduously pursued a half-century-long goal of overturning the traditional consensus on biologically intact families."

I had just read Milo's recent comments (below) on Facebook laying out his response to Berkeley and it seems to me that he, and several anonymous donors, fancy him as the fresh face of this 'culture war' with a whole new tactic called "epic trolling". 

Is this the kind of speech you want representing the conservative Christian movement? I'm guessing conservatives are going to have a cultural civil war on their hands real soon and conservative Mormons are going to find a lot more in common with progressive Mormons than they do with the new right. I think that is the political reconfiguration Fluhman is talking about.

As you've indicated these kinds of things can be somewhat cyclical, and Milo is just riding a wave I believe created by Obama. I don't like the guy. I can agree that he is a troll, but trolls have a right to free speech too. That means at public universities if some group invites him - like a gay group, they have an obligation to protect people's rights, and not allow crowds of protesters to get out of control and shut things down. In failing to do this, they are just giving him the increased media attention he wants. In this regard he is much like an alt-right version of Trump who rode a wave of free publicity into office by saying controversial things. If everyone just ignored the guy, and let him rant and rave at gay club meetings, I think a lot of this stuff would go away. Certainly free speech rights don't give him the right to be invited to any campus he wants.

The danger in restricting him is that he is not promoting violence, so the restrictions seem to be a reaction to the violent protests which sends a signal that spoiled snowflakes and liberal fascists can succeed in limiting free speech with these tactics, and indeed we are seeing this kind of thing with non-offensive conservatives such as Ben Shapiro who regularly gets invited to Republican groups, but then gets people who stand up on the stage and yell or try to talk over him in order to prevent his views from being heard. Free speech is based on the premise that we don't limit someone's right to speak in public forums based on content we don't personally like. These tactics if allowed to succeed endanger mainstream conservatism which is already rarely encountered in our colleges.

If all we want is liberal ideology, then I guess allowing these protesters to get their way is fine. To me their very tactics bespeak a highly troubling undercurrent in the politics of the American left, and trouble for true democracy. 

[Gray]

14 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

I think the problem is that there weren't many peaceful protests.

I think the problem might be that non-violent protests don't make headlines or stick in public memory. 

[clarkgoble]

1 hour ago, Gray said:

 

Edited May 8, 2017 by clarkgoble

[clarkgoble]

1 hour ago, Gray said:

dupe

Edited May 8, 2017 by clarkgoble

[clarkgoble]

Dupe

Edited May 8, 2017 by clarkgoble

[clarkgoble]

1 hour ago, Gray said:

There is no such thing as the "alt left." The alt right is an actual movement, the alt left is a creation of the alt right. 

Noted alt right organizations like Time or Vanity Fair.

http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/03/why-the-alt-left-is-a-problem

http://time.com/4593753/bernie-sanders-alt-left/

It's a fairly good description for the fringe of the left like antifa whether they've embraced the term the way the alt-right did or not. Both groups are very small. New Republic gave a bad argument about why there is no alt-left but it's a horrible argument avoiding all the things the alt left groups like antifa are doing.

[Rajah Manchou]

6 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

As for a mainstream conservative, why do you keep neglecting the Portland parade I've brought up several times? Especially when honestly that's the most deeply disturbing of all the examples.

Wait, that parade was cancelled because of this and nothing more?

"You have seen how much power we have downtown and that the police cannot stop us from shutting down roads so please consider your decision wisely," the anonymous email said, telling organizers they could cancel the Republican group's registration or else face action from protesters. "This is non-negotiable."

Anybody could have written that. How is that the most disturbing of all examples?

[Gray]

3 minutes ago, RevTestament said:

As you've indicated these kinds of things can be somewhat cyclical, and Milo is just riding a wave I believe created by Obama. I don't like the guy. I can agree that he is a troll, but trolls have a right to free speech too. That means at public universities if some group invites him - like a gay group, they have an obligation to protect people's rights, and not allow crowds of protesters to get out of control and shut things down. In failing to do this, they are just giving him the increased media attention he wants. In this regard he is much like an alt-right version of Trump who rode a wave of free publicity into office by saying controversial things. If everyone just ignored the guy, and let him rant and rave at gay club meetings, I think a lot of this stuff would go away. Certainly free speech rights don't give him the right to be invited to any campus he wants.

The danger in restricting him is that he is not promoting violence, so the restrictions seem to be a reaction to the violent protests which sends a signal that spoiled snowflakes and liberal fascists can succeed in limiting free speech with these tactics, and indeed we are seeing this kind of thing with non-offensive conservatives such as Ben Shapiro who regularly gets invited to Republican groups, but then gets people who stand up on the stage and yell or try to talk over him in order to prevent his views from being heard. Free speech is based on the premise that we don't limit someone's right to speak in public forums based on content we don't personally like. These tactics if allowed to succeed endanger mainstream conservatism which is already rarely encountered in our colleges.

If all we want is liberal ideology, then I guess allowing these protesters to get their way is fine. To me their very tactics bespeak a highly troubling undercurrent in the politics of the American left, and trouble for true democracy. 

Campus protests aren't going to overthrow democracy. They've been around for decades. Being against things doesn't make liberals "snowflakes". As far as I can tell most of the right wing's ideology is defined in opposition to the left. 

What's more likely to overthrow our democracy is Russian interference in elections. 

[Gray]

3 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/03/why-the-alt-left-is-a-problem

It's a fairly good description for the fringe of the left like antifa whether they've embraced the term the way the alt-right did or not. Both groups are very small. New Republic gave a bad argument about why there is no alt-left but it's a horrible argument avoiding all the things the alt left groups like antifa are doing.

"Alt left" is a term invented purely for the purpose of saying "I know you are but what am I" whenever someone says "alt right." 

[Scott Lloyd]

8 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

Did you miss the whole very public resignation he made? It was a big deal in the news and was discussed for weeks. It was directly related to Trump and the rise of the alt right. BTW - did you realize he was a practicing orthodox Jew? Not exactly the favorites of white supremacists. Also while I've never liked Breitbart it's a very different place from when Breitbart himself was around. Bannon completely changed it.

There's some irony in Gray's pointing a finger at Shapiro as one who deserves to have his freedom of speech curtailed; Shapiro has written a book called Bullies: How the Left's Culture of Fear and Intimidation Silences Americans.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/1476710007/?tag=slatmaga-20

Bullying. That's what's at issue here. Bullying and mobs.

 

[clarkgoble]

d

4 minutes ago, Gray said:

I think the problem might be that non-violent protests don't make headlines or stick in public memory. 

That's definitely the problem as the violent protestors see it.

[RevTestament]

2 minutes ago, Gray said:

He at least rejects the anti-antisemitism of the alt right, but their focus tends to be more on immigrants in general, Muslims and Hispanics in particular, and of course black people. 

But based on his comments he's still an extremist and a nut. Anyone who paints everyone on the other side (liberals or conservatives) as "nasty" "pathetic" and "evil" has to have a screw loose. 

If you listen to him closely, he is calling leftist beliefs and policies evil. He doesn't believe in redistribution by government. He believes that is just an excuse for someone to come forceably take your hard-earned stuff. He says that is evil. He is slightly too "libertarian" for my tastes - I believe capitalism does need some governmental controls for the good of society - but I really like a lot of what he says. He is just not an economist so doesn't understand that capitalism doesn't always know/do what is best. That is why there are anti-trust law etc.

He is also common sense when it comes to religion, and doesn't believe in government enforcing religious views on others.

[clarkgoble]

2 minutes ago, Rajah Manchou said:

Wait, that parade was cancelled because of this and nothing more?

"You have seen how much power we have downtown and that the police cannot stop us from shutting down roads so please consider your decision wisely," the anonymous email said, telling organizers they could cancel the Republican group's registration or else face action from protesters. "This is non-negotiable."

Anybody could have written that. How is that the most disturbing of all examples?

It's disturbing because it illustrates how the threat of violence in the context of Berkeley protests is shutting down political speech in general places. You don't see shutting down a parade because they are fearful of these people as a problem? You don't see how that's a direct threat to political speech? Also part of the issue was that given anarchist protests near Portland most assumed the threat was real. "Like Berkeley, leftist Portland has been rocked since November by a relentless stream of left-wing demonstrations against the president, in some cases resulting in vandalism and arrests."

Personally I think they should have still held the parade but if you don't see shutting it down as an issue I'm not sure what to say.

 

[clarkgoble]

5 minutes ago, Gray said:

"Alt left" is a term invented purely for the purpose of saying "I know you are but what am I" whenever someone says "alt right." 

You know I might think you had a point were there not groups like antifa doing fairly regular violent protests.

[Gray]

5 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

d

That's definitely the problem as the violent protestors see it.

I doubt most of them are thinking about it like that. But that's the problem with trying to estimate off the top of your head how many campus protests actually turn violent 

[Scott Lloyd]

5 minutes ago, Gray said:

Campus protests aren't going to overthrow democracy. They've been around for decades. Being against things doesn't make liberals "snowflakes". As far as I can tell most of the right wing's ideology is defined in opposition to the left. 

 

For the umpteenth time, "campus protests" aren't at issue here. It's riots, vandalism, assaults, threats, intimidation, coercion, bullying.

Your attempt to minimize these things as "campus protests" or "peaceful protests' amounts to disinformation.

[Gray]

6 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

There's some irony in Gray's pointing a finger at Shapiro as one who deserves to have his freedom of speech curtailed; Shapiro has written a book called Bullies: How the Left's Culture of Fear and Intimidation Silences Americans.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/1476710007/?tag=slatmaga-20

Bullying. That's what's at issue here. Bullying and mobs.

 

No one has ever curtailed Shapiro's freedom of speech. Is this an example of right wing snowflakism? Shapiro is entitled to speak at any college he wants? 

[Gray]

1 minute ago, Scott Lloyd said:

For the umpteenth time, "campus protests" aren't at issue here. It's riots, vandalism, assaults, threats, intimidation, coercion, bullying.

Your attempt to minimize these things as "campus protests" or "peaceful protests' amounts to disinformation.

You're talking about campus protests that turn rowdy or violent.  But they're still campus protests. 

[Gray]

2 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

You know I might think you had a point were there not groups like antifa doing fairly regular violent protests.

Antifa is not the "alt left"

[clarkgoble]

11 minutes ago, Gray said:

Campus protests aren't going to overthrow democracy. They've been around for decades. Being against things doesn't make liberals "snowflakes". As far as I can tell most of the right wing's ideology is defined in opposition to the left. 

What's more likely to overthrow our democracy is Russian interference in elections. 

If we've defined down problems as merely being an issue only if they'll overthrow democracy no wonder free speech is under threat.

Just to refresh your memory, I know losing free speech doesn't undermine democracy. We had censorship of television and movies in the 50's and 60's as well as pretty heavy censorship of media that might affect children. So censorship definitely was bigger in the past yet democracy survived. However that doesn't mean it's a good thing. I think many of us think McCarthy like blacklists would be a bad thing if they happened again.

As for Russian interference, honestly the interference was pretty minor. But I definitely think we should be doing something about it and don't like how Republicans haven't taken in seriously. Surely we can worry about multiple problems at the same time though.

Edited May 8, 2017 by clarkgoble

[clarkgoble]

1 minute ago, Gray said:

Antifa is not the "alt left"

Because...

[clarkgoble]

2 minutes ago, Gray said:

You're talking about campus protests that turn rowdy or violent.  But they're still campus protests. 

You don't come equipped with fireworks and pepper spray and then say they just turned rowdy as if it was something people got too excited about. This was planned and has been repeated.

[Gray]

5 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

Because...

For the same reason they're not The Avengers. There's no such thing.

Edited May 8, 2017 by Gray