Milo Yiannopoulos comes to Berkeley tommorow. 1.9k people pledging to prostest. Prepare your Angus!!

[M3t4tr0n]

He sure is crafty

Right wingers act like people like the Kochs don't exist lol

You would think that Soros was Putin or something the way they go on about him. Oh wait never mind they love Putin

 

[xcvbn]

That is about as bad as the left crying about racial profiling. Act like a thug, get pulled over, and cry. The same with pulling guns on cops, get killed, then riot, and trash your own city. lol

A perfect case of identity politics driving people towards the definition of insanity.

 

[Toastytoy]

"The violence was instigated by a group of about 150 masked agitators who came onto campus and interrupted an otherwise non-violent protest."

"The masked agitators came to campus eastbound on Bancroft Way, and fire damage and other destruction to the Stiles Hall construction site, where a new residence hall is planned, was reported. The group entered campus and immediately began throwing rocks at officers. In an effort to avoid injuries to innocent members of the surrounding crowd who might have been caught in the middle, police officers exercised restraint and did not respond with force."

So.. you want Berkeley to expel masked non-student agitators that came from off campus to disrupt a peaceful protest of over 2000 law abiding students?

What makes you so sure that these "masked instigators" aren't students? And what exactly is your point in this entire exchange?

 

[Rational Poster]

What makes you so sure that these "masked instigators" aren't students? And what exactly is your point in this entire exchange?

They came from off campus, reportedly by your own source.

I think it's a reasonable assumption.

 

[ripskater]

If college isn't a place to voice your opinion as a group in protest anymore please let us know where is more suitable to you because that's where it has always been done historically.

They could voice their opinion at the Milo speech. There is typically a Q and A time at these events. That's where professors and students debate or ask questions. Instead they want to shut it down.

 

[n...not crazy]

The point he was making is that to many people wanna use violence to stomp out a protestors rights real quick.

That doesn't even include the violent ones, they just don't want people using their freedom in such a way

So people are using threats of violence to stomp out protest? I don't see that happening, provide an example.

Protests shut down Milo all the time. That's the only shutting down I see happening.

 

[in the]

 

[Jack V Savage]

1. The facts do not some to support that as all the major philosophers and the branches it was inspired of are of the left. Sorry, based on all the evidence available and the clear chronology of the post modernist philosophers (who are all left) that the author was engaging in argument by selective observation.

Hoo boy. First, the facts absolutely support the point. If you're familiar with the people being discussed, this is not even controversial. Second, the author--a conservative icon--was not doing what you seem to think. In fact, the point was actually to attack the left, at one point comparing them to savages who find tools from an ancient civilization.

2. Actually, that's bald false equivalence to say that "crime has fallen therefore the cultural situation is alleviated," no not at all, and let's play that game out.

Actually that's not what was said at all. I said that the big questions among people studying crime are why it's falling and why it rose in the first place, while you seem to be suggesting that it's actually hopeless or that alleviating crime requires some nebulous "cultural change." Whatever the cause, practical solutions are working. Also, it is very odd that your goal wouldn't be a straight reduction in crime, rather than a group-focused metric.

3. My hypocritical right? Hmm, fascinating.

All right then, whites represent the dominant culture, why would they not be the most successful, or Asians, or many Hispanics who adapt well to the hegemony of the traditional "white" culture? That's what I am saying. Trying to fragment a whole society into sects of societies leads to volatility, not E Pluribus Unum.

This is a complete side-stepping of the issue, is it not? We talked about differential success levels of subgroups, and I pointed out that there is a huge disparity in intergenerational wealth transfers, so that blacks and whites with the same incomes still have very large average differences in wealth. This is a line that can be pursued further if you're interested in actually understanding the issue rather than simply promoting despair for ideological reasons.

You also don't respond to the point that you're characterizing fact-based disagreement with your broad and unsupported assertions as "shouting down." In fact, the issues you've brought up are seriously discussed by researchers in the fields in far more serious ways than you seem to be aware of. Generally, I'm seeing a lot of really dated oversimplifications of real discussions.

4. No the exact opposite as A. Cognitive bias has a lot of awful obstacles to being a useful scientific tool and B. the-bias-is-not-due-to-skin-color, it is due to culture.

The cause of bias is not really relevant to a discussion about the fact of it.

5. I think you're trying to be on the level with that explanation, but it is the dominant thought in academia, not the fringe. That dominance publishes the papers, which influences the thinkers, who make policy for the political class.

That has not been my observation at all. I don't know what journals you're reading, and I suspect that you are basing your claims on nothing more than stereotypes you've absorbed through the right-wing media.

6. The "alt right" is like a few thousand guys angry behind their keyboards sick of PC garbage trolling the life out of everyone. When they have "conferences" a few dozen guys in bow ties and suspenders show up talking about cartoon frogs.

The alt right has displaced the religious right (which in turn displaced the liberal right) as the dominant faction in the GOP. Note who won the GOP primary (beating out candidates from both groups).

 

[in the]

It's both weird and hilarious watching some of you progressives, who spent years lambasting libertarian conspiracy theorists, now take a page out of their playbook and try to convince yourselves that this violence being done against Trump supporters are actually agent provocateurs sent by Trump and/or his cohorts. Once again, you guys are doing everything you can to deny the reality that even if you loathe Trump, your side has elements that need to be purged. But it's too late now, you xers should have done it years ago.

Trump is turning everything upside-down. Some of the libertarian conspiracy theorists on this board whom I used to engage/debate/argue with years back are sounding way more rational than many of the progressives on this site.

 

[BruceLeeOnTRT]

Oh fuck this is golden

You and bruce are conservatives calling for restricting freedoms. So let's ban silencers, muzzle flashes, muzzle brakes, adjustable stocks, folding stocks, pistol grips, and 30rd mags right?!!>

Not a conservative (pro gay marriage, pro choice, anti-war). Thanks for trying to fit me into your narrow minded view of the world however, lol. Mask bans during protests are common in many western countries as another poster has already told you. If you read the passage Rational Poster just quoted, you'll understand why. The 150 masked agitators were not students, and what they did put the peaceful protesters in danger. They were attacking police, trying to get them to go riot mode on college kids who were there to support a cause. Engaging in terrorism is not a right.

 

[in the]

http://archive.is/Jnpcl

 

[riddleofsteel]

Tearing my argument up? lol This happens regularly and there is no evidnce at all that anything is being done by the campus. Who's the one who's reaching?

Berkeley rarely does anything punishment wise in regards to protests on campus.
One of the few times they have was back in January 2010 for a 2009 protest/riot in regards to an increase in tuition & fees, Berkeley suspended 2 students. Then dropped one student's suspension the next month, February. Then in May the suspension of the other student was ended - an undisclosed agreement was reached.
So, multiple students arrested for causing damage to the chancellor's house and only punishment was one student being briefly suspended (and thus missing the 2010 spring semester) and another student missing one semester and an undisclosed settlement.

https://www.berkeleyside.com/2010/05/05/two-uc-students-face-disiplinary-hearing-today/

That protest and resulting vandalism was in regards to Berkeley itself, their policies which is really what the administration actually cares about, have to squash any protest about their ever climbing fees.

 

[dontsnitch]

http://archive.is/Jnpcl

Priceless.

 

[Rational Poster]

They could voice their opinion at the Milo speech. There is typically a Q and A time at these events. That's where professors and students debate or ask questions. Instead they want to shut it down.

It is their right to protest without participating in the event.

 

[irish_thug]

A ban on masks is a smart preemptive tactic. Why wait around for a leftist degenerate in a mask to destroy something or physically assault someone when you can arrest them for wearing a mask before they commit a serious crime?

Canada and many US states already have mask laws.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-mask_laws#United_States

 

[ripskater]

It is their right to protest without participating in the event.

Yes, I've already said that is their right. My point was that professors are making this a more dangerous situation by telling their students to attend these protests.

 

[Rational Poster]

Yes, I've already said that is their right. My point was that professors are making this a more dangerous situation by telling their students to attend these protests.

How?

The agitators came from off campus. The students were peaceful.

Local law enforcement failed to keep outside actors from attending a student event and protest.

 

[xcvbn]

Not a conservative (pro gay marriage, pro choice, anti-war). Thanks for trying to fit me into your narrow minded view of the world however, lol. Mask bans during protests are common in many western countries as another poster has already told you. If you read the passage Rational Poster just quoted, you'll understand why. The 150 masked agitators were not students, and what they did put the peaceful protesters in danger. They were attacking police, trying to get them to go riot mode on college kids who were there to support a cause. Engaging in terrorism is not a right.

So in that wall of text that I didn't read did you describe in which exact way masks assaulted people?

 

[ripskater]

How?

Instead of 40 or so violent protestors to deal with, cops have to deal with 1000 onlookers also.

That's more decisions to be made by cops in use of pepper spray and crowd control. Also more people emboldens the violent protestors. It's easier to hide while you shoot flares and fireworks at law enforcement.

 

[InternetHero]

Hoo boy. First, the facts absolutely support the point. If you're familiar with the people being discussed, this is not even controversial. Second, the author--a conservative icon--was not doing what you seem to think. In fact, the point was actually to attack the left, at one point comparing them to savages who find tools from an ancient civilization. (1)



Actually that's not what was said at all. I said that the big questions among people studying crime are why it's falling and why it rose in the first place, while you seem to be suggesting that it's actually hopeless or that alleviating crime requires some nebulous "cultural change." Whatever the cause, practical solutions are working. Also, it is very odd that your goal wouldn't be a straight reduction in crime, rather than a group-focused metric (2)



This is a complete side-stepping of the issue, is it not? We talked about differential success levels of subgroups, and I pointed out that there is a huge disparity in intergenerational wealth transfers, so that blacks and whites with the same incomes still have very large average differences in wealth. This is a line that can be pursued further if you're interested in actually understanding the issue rather than simply promoting despair for ideological reasons. (4)

You also don't respond to the point that you're characterizing fact-based disagreement with your broad and unsupported assertions as "shouting down." In fact, the issues you've brought up are seriously discussed by researchers in the fields in far more serious ways than you seem to be aware of. Generally, I'm seeing a lot of really dated oversimplifications of real discussions. (5)



The cause of bias is not really relevant to a discussion about the fact of it.



That has not been my observation at all. I don't know what journals you're reading, and I suspect that you are basing your claims on nothing more than stereotypes you've absorbed through the right-wing media.



The alt right has displaced the religious right (which in turn displaced the liberal right) as the dominant faction in the GOP. Note who won the GOP primary (beating out candidates from both groups).

1. No the facts do not, you pointed out an author who makes a counter claim to the clear and present post modern philosophers of the left who do in fact exist and were verified in this thread.

That argument has a very very high chance of being an argument by selective observation, and may have some truth in it. If you want to start listing all the shadow post modernists of the right and their theories, well, then we have something to work with.

Right now you have an assertion based on a political book (which I'll try to look at,) it's a completely bald assertion right now, all videos from uh Carl Rove aside, that by the agreed basis of who the post modern philosophers are... men of the left. That has been verified by name.

2. Yes you said those things, however, I said none of those things and think you missed my point in there, and I am afraid you are not seeing the forest for the trees.

Crime as a whole is irrelevant when if your cultural community is committing 5x (Or almost 10x) the violent crime rate of another community with the same levels of poverty. It's nothing more than a distraction to talk about general criminality, and an assertion on top of that as you did not show any of the evidence of your own cause/effect of why crime in general is going down.

3. I don't believe I was "shouting down" anything, nor advocating that, and if you do not know the basics of cultural anthropology there is not much I can do to give updates on Hofstede or Hall.

I can agree that economic disparity would be and could be a factor in in certain cases, but when poverty is factored in, the massive effect of the cultural differences remains.

4. You did not prove that, you stated it, and I am interested in more of your evidence.

5. If that were true, it would be fair, as you summarily dismissed every argument of culture with your own assurances it is economic without any of the reference. As well you are making an "appeal to stone," ignoring my arguments as "common sense" (to you and a collection of unnamed, unknown, and unrelated "experts") to frame your own argument of authority, an authority you apparently know little about when it comes to culture differentiation, or, for that matter my expertise therein.

I would have more faith if you had acknowledged any of the clear comparisons, arguments, or questions I raised, you skipped back to economics, your forte.

Let's revisit "4," you could take a poorer subgroup of Hispanic, white, or Mung Americans and analyze their rates of violent crime compared to the black community, and would still find the disparity for the higher levels.

I get the feeling this will be my last post as well, no offense, but if you are just going to present a parade of assertions without arguing them, and then summarily dismiss my comparisons, arguments, and questions, it would be a waste of our time.