Milo Storms Twitter RNC Booth asking them a simple question: if they believe in free speech

[Zeke's Chaingun]

Straw-man.

Straw man? I am responding to a straw man.

Libertarians always end up with their dick in their own ass (I chose this metaphor in honor of Milo).

On the one hand they claim that private businesses should be able to serve or not serve customers on whatever basis the owners so choose.

While, on the other hand, when it is the libertarian, himself, getting thrown out of the "store", the exclusionary behavior is condemned as somehow fundamentally unAmerican, unconstitutional or unethical.

The chickens always eventually come home to roost for free-market ideologues.

Again, since we are talking about Milo, Milo isn't defying free market principles here. And I don't even consider Milo a very true free market guy, primarily because he supports Trump and I see little from Trump that is as principled as, say, Ron Paul.

But since we are talking about "libertarians" and "free market" supporters, lets get our facts straight on this situation. Milo is not calling for anything that is anti-free market. He was banned by Twitter, which is a company that says they stand for free speech, but in practice they do not. So he is calling them out, drawing attention to their hypocrisy, and raising his own stock at the same time. He isn't calling for Government intervention. He isn't calling for more laws. He isn't calling for more regulations. So what the fuck are you even talking about here? Understanding what I just said, look at your above quote. It makes no sense. It doesn't apply here at all. This is nothing more than a straw man hit piece directed at libertarians by someone who clearly doesn't understand libertarian ideas.

Right now, if you were an honest fellow, you'd begin to see that your post is not a fair depiction of Milo OR libertarians. If you were an honest fellow you'd back track off of these statements. I don't predict that you will though. I predict a dodge riddled in semantics and obfuscation. I hope I am wrong.

You see, a libertarian can be "thrown out of a store" and STILL have a problem with it. They can STILL be true to libertarian free market principles, as long as they aren't employing the use of force to make the "store" do what they want. Protesting isn't force. Calling attention to the situation is not force. Boycotting is not force. So your entire analogy above fails.

So again, I don't think you understand libertarians.

I'm simply saying that this situation should wake up libertarian ideologues to the tyranny of the marketplace and to the tragic flaw inherent in any so-called "dollar democracy".

What's happening here is even worse than mob rule. Because in the marketplace you don't even need to form a mob to deprive a marginalized group their rights. You just need one authoritarian billionaire.

There is no tyranny if force is not used. We are not forced to use Twitter. If Twitter wants to be a biased and partisan business, then fine. They can. And in response we can call attention to it and hopefully harm their reputation by showing to the public just how dishonest they are. None of this gives rise to the call to "wake up" anyone. Nor is there tyranny.

 

[wandiswar]

Gay Conservative = uncle Tom.

 

[Madmick]

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you are genuinely in the dark regarding my position on this issue.

(I will also state, for the record, that I am not entirely clear on the point you are trying to make, either.)

I would remind you of the stance I took in the WR when Jeff Bezos decided to ban the sale of all merchandise bearing the image of the confederate flag. I took a lot of flack from the faux-liberals here for that one.

You have a choice now: Continue to rail against me in ignorance or take a step back and ask me to clarify my position for you.

And what does the Community Reinvestment Act have to do with this topic? You have lost me entirely with that one.

LOL@"I have a choice."

I bludgeoned you for that garbage post and have forced you into a rapid defensive backpedaling. I didn't punish you for your "position" on this matter, I punished you for sneering exclusively at libertarians while misinterpreting the source of their outrage by condemning their position as self-defeating when their position isn't the one in the driver's seat. Libertarians aren't being inconsistent; the underlying liberal philosophy that has deprived them of balance has. Therein lies the hypocrisy that earned you a slap upside the head.

Liberals believed in freedom of expression before they became the firm American majority, and before they found themselves in absolute control of a tech sector that was suddenly the town square for the entire world. It's amazing how quickly defending minority opinions went out of fashion once that happened.

Even worse is your "position" itself. I don't need it clarified. The solution to the problem of inconsistent liberalism isn't an even more profound state-ordained liberalism. Who do you think will be in charge of the politicians making the laws determining what said "billionaires" can do? How do you think most of those billionaires vote? Step outside of Silicon Valley and suddenly you'll realize this noble liberalism you're touting isn't turning out the big hitters. You're proposal to empower the government to disempower businessmen will ultimately prove self-defeating to the liberal base itself.

Milo still has freedom of speech. Nothing has been infringed.

The owners of a corporation have decided they don't want him participating on it. They don't have to fund his views if they don't want to.

That's real freedom.

I would love nothing more than to see Wal-Mart threaten to stop selling all NBA-affiliated gear until the NBA reneges on its threat to take its All-Star games elsewhere, or for the oil companies to threaten to turn off the gas to California unless the governor bends over to some political demand of theirs. Turn this into a money war.

I want a litmus test of how much guys like you sincerely believe in "real freedom".

 

[Gervinho]

Gay Conservative = uncle Tom.

He's actually gay christian conservative

 

[Zeke's Chaingun]

Libertarians believe in the rights of private business until they're the ones getting thrown out.

You're an idiot.

That's not what Libertarians believe at all. It takes someone with their head stuck REALLY FAR up their ass to say something so stupid.

If you boycott a business because they throw you out, how is that violating the private business's (business owner's) rights? If you protest the business because they threw you out, how does that violate their rights? If you tell the media they threw you out and you tell the media how much that business lies, how is that violating their rights?

You don't even know what you're talking about to say something so fucking stupid.

Getting Government to force the business to let you in... that's a problem. Getting Government to force a business pay a fine for not letting you in... that's a problem.

That you cannot understand this simple concept and these simple differences yet feel confident enough to shit on Libertarians for it demonstrates that you've got no intellectual honesty.

If I were you, and I fucked up this bad, I'd actually take a moment to consider my fuck up. I'd think to myself, "How did I go so wrong? Are my biases impacting my reason?" But I doubt you'll do that. I bet you'll double down on your stupid post and/or misdirect attention from your shitty post.

 

[Zeke's Chaingun]

Milo still has freedom of speech. Nothing has been infringed.

The owners of a corporation have decided they don't want him participating on it. They don't have to fund his views if they don't want to.

That's real freedom.

Milo isn't saying that he doesn't have free speech. He's pointing out that Twitter pretends to care about free speech but they obviously don't. So he's exposing this and trolling them as a result. None of his actions contradict a belief in freedom.

Fucking God, do people really not care about being honest at all? "Hey, I irrationally hate Libertarians! There's one! I won't try to understand their position at all, I'm just happy to shit on it!"

 

[Rational Poster]

Milo isn't saying that he doesn't have free speech. He's pointing out that Twitter pretends to care about free speech but they obviously don't. So he's exposing this and trolling them as a result. None of his actions contradict a belief in freedom.

Fucking God, do people really not care about being honest at all? "Hey, I irrationally hate Libertarians! There's one! I won't try to understand their position at all, I'm just happy to shit on it!"

They don't care about his free speech and they're entitled not to care about it.

 

[Zeke's Chaingun]

They don't care about his free speech and they're entitled not to care about it.

Red Herring.

No one is saying that they must care about it. No one is saying that they are entitled to care about it. Your criticisms appear to be completely off the mark, across the board.

What they're challenging is the idea that Twitter has put out there that they AREN'T partisan, that they DO care about free speech. Milo and them KNOW that Twitter is full of shit, so they're mocking them, drawing attention to them, exposing them, etc.

If Twitter wants to say that they're for free speech, then they are going to be called out for not following up their claims with action. That's all fair. None of this is "anti-free market". It IS the free market, since Government isn't involved at all.

 

[Rational Poster]

Red Herring.

No one is saying that they must care about it. No one is saying that they are entitled to care about it. Your criticisms appear to be completely off the mark, across the board.

What they're challenging is the idea that Twitter has put out there that they AREN'T partisan, that they DO care about free speech. Milo and them KNOW that Twitter is full of shit, so they're mocking them, drawing attention to them, exposing them, etc.

If Twitter wants to say that they're for free speech, then they are going to be called out for not following up their claims with action. That's all fair. None of this is "anti-free market". It IS the free market, since Government isn't involved at all.

I don't really care one way or the other how twitter runs their show. I don't even use it.

Milo is barely a step above a sherdog forum troll, so it's nice to see him cry.

You're right, I'm biased.

 

[Gervinho]

Red Herring.

No one is saying that they must care about it. No one is saying that they are entitled to care about it. Your criticisms appear to be completely off the mark, across the board.

What they're challenging is the idea that Twitter has put out there that they AREN'T partisan, that they DO care about free speech. Milo and them KNOW that Twitter is full of shit, so they're mocking them, drawing attention to them, exposing them, etc.

If Twitter wants to say that they're for free speech, then they are going to be called out for not following up their claims with action. That's all fair. None of this is "anti-free market". It IS the free market, since Government isn't involved at all.

But when you draw attention to people, there has to be consequences. Twitter aint gonna respond and ignore these people. Milo aint gonna come back. . Now who is leaving twitter for Milo? Hell Milo himself is desperate to come back. They know they have time on their side, Milo if he keep doing this 3-4 weeks from now. People will say we get it, just get over it. I think they have handled this perfect. Just not engage with these people and let it die down.

 

[dontsnitch]

LOL@"I have a choice."

I bludgeoned you for that garbage post and have forced you into a rapid defensive backpedaling. I didn't punish you for your "position" on this matter, I punished you for sneering exclusively at libertarians while misinterpreting the source of their outrage by condemning their position as self-defeating when their position isn't the one in the driver's seat. Libertarians aren't being inconsistent; the underlying liberal philosophy that has deprived them of balance has. Therein lies the hypocrisy that earned you a slap upside the head.

Liberals believed in freedom of expression before they became the firm American majority, and before they found themselves in absolute control of a tech sector that was suddenly the town square for the entire world. It's amazing how quickly defending minority opinions went out of fashion once that happened.

Even worse is your "position" itself. I don't need it clarified. The solution to the problem of inconsistent liberalism isn't an even more profound state-ordained liberalism. Who do you think will be in charge of the politicians making the laws determining what said "billionaires" can do? How do you think most of those billionaires vote? Step outside of Silicon Valley and suddenly you'll realize this noble liberalism you're touting isn't turning out the big hitters. You're proposal to empower the government to disempower businessmen will ultimately prove self-defeating to the liberal base itself.

I would love nothing more than to see Wal-Mart threaten to stop selling all NBA-affiliated gear until the NBA reneges on its threat to take its All-Star games elsewhere, or for the oil companies to threaten to turn off the gas to California unless the governor bends over to some political demand of theirs. Turn this into a money war.

I want a litmus test of how much guys like you sincerely believe in "real freedom".

In regards to the litmus test, I've seen a pattern of people denying the preliminary point of a "Liberal majority" so I doubt they will concede to the further and more damning point of selectively choosing when freedom applies.

 

[Zeke's Chaingun]

I don't really care one way or the other how twitter runs their show. I don't even use it.

Milo is barely a step above a sherdog forum troll, so it's nice to see him cry.

You're right, I'm biased.

Well, I can at least respect that you admit your bias.

 

[Zeke's Chaingun]

But when you draw attention to people, there has to be consequences. Twitter aint gonna respond and ignore these people. Milo aint gonna come back. . Now who is leaving twitter for Milo? Hell Milo himself is desperate to come back. They know they have time on their side, Milo if he keep doing this 3-4 weeks from now. People will say we get it, just get over it. I think they have handled this perfect. Just not engage with these people and let it die down.

I don't believe Milo is coming back either. I do believe he wants to, quite badly. I don't believe people are leaving Twitter for Milo either.

But have they handled this perfectly? No freaking way. They're being exposed because they HAVE been biased. They've banned Milo when you have the Supreme Leader of Iran calling for another holocaust. Yet they ban Milo. Leslie Jones - or whatever her name is - has tweeted racist things before and had even urged her followers to "Get her!" to someone she didn't like. So she did everything and more than what Milo did to get banned. Twitter is a biased place, and they treat people unfairly. It's their right to do so, but what this situation has done is help expose it. Whether they like it or not, Twitter is taking a reputation hit from all of this. They'll likely recover, sure. But if they keep stuff like this up they WILL lose people and they will help undermine their own business because those they alienate (conservatives) will seek an alternative.

 

[Gervinho]

I don't believe Milo is coming back either. I do believe he wants to, quite badly. I don't believe people are leaving Twitter for Milo either.

But have they handled this perfectly? No freaking way. They're being exposed because they HAVE been biased. They've banned Milo when you have the Supreme Leader of Iran calling for another holocaust. Yet they ban Milo. Leslie Jones - or whatever her name is - has tweeted racist things before and had even urged her followers to "Get her!" to someone she didn't like. So she did everything and more than what Milo did to get banned. Twitter is a biased place, and they treat people unfairly. It's their right to do so, but what this situation has done is help expose it. Whether they like it or not, Twitter is taking a reputation hit from all of this. They'll likely recover, sure. But if they keep stuff like this up they WILL lose people and they will help undermine their own business because those they alienate (conservatives) will seek an alternative.

I think slowly we will see people get banned. But they dont want to be dictated to who to ban by others and give people the encouragement to demand ban this person he said or that. It will become a silly game where people from different political side will try to score points on each other. Right now they are letting this die down and slowly clean house. Thats what I think they are doing. Also it seems they were well prepared for Milo when he ambushed them with the camera. To say 8 mins straight we aint doing any interview takes some discipline.

 

[Devout Pessimist]

Bro Rogan talks about how ridiculous Milo's Twitter ban is.

 

[gigantalor]

 

[Ruprecht]

Horsehit. Twitter responds with the same inactivity to most instances of harassment and death threats, and only reacts when the negative publicity reaches whatever their threshold is.

 

[Big_Chief_Stove]

Twitter believes in free speech, but they also believe that they have a right to ban people who use the platform to harass others. Milo is not the innocent victim of being censored. He was talk talking about how bad a movie was, but taking part in the personal attacks of an individual.

Leslie Jones has attacked people on twitter simply for being white.

 

[Cirris]

Bro Rogan talks about how ridiculous Milo's Twitter ban is.

I remember #Gamergate members making somewhat of a fuss about the "Truth and Safety Council" back when Twitter first announced it. They noticed that most of the council were all left wing outfits, which included "Feminist Frequency" who was public enemy #1 to #Gamergate groups.

I think Milo and some of the other bans and "de-verificatians" has been the natural result of that program..

When you put biased political outfits in charge of arbitrary rulings, expect it to go horribly wrong.

I don't expect it to get any better. Once wikileaks twitter account caught JAck Dorsey redhanded in the hypocrisy. He went silent.

Again, my gut tells me Milo isn't going to get unbanned. Jack and Twitter are just going to doubledown and stay silent until the dust settles and #freemilo fades.

 

[m52nickerson]

Leslie Jones has attacked people on twitter simply for being white.

From what I say she did not attack anyone individually.