He looks so ridiculous to normal people when you just show his statements and quotes to them. This whole article is a lot of quotes, and why talking like that is dangerous and bad. But i only even heard of this douche when people tried to stop him from talking. Before Berkeley, never heard of him. Because he was just some internet loud mouth. If you try to quash someone's speech, you give it credibility. People who believe what this guy thinks can now express themselves as his supporters, and thus be argued with and criticized, especially for supporting someone who turns out to be a piece of shit like Milo seems to be. But if you treat them aggressively, or you refuse to address them, then you force them into hiding. They go into their own echo chambers of Facebook and where ever else. Trump's win is a good example of this. The polls were all wrong, because a lot of people knew better than to say they supported anti-Islam, anti-immigrant policies in public. But those people exist. There are a ton of them. Obama said something really smart in his farewell address. Go talk to people, in person. He didn't say "Shut down people who say vile things." It's impossible in the first place because I can start a website that's available to literally everyone in the country and say whatever I want to whomever will listen. I can write a book and publish it on my own. I can get linked on reddit and 4chan and distribute every terrible idea I have to people who centralize to hear it. You can't just call people stupid and evil and expect to change their minds. If your ideas are so great, then you should understand how to make them palatable to others, and show them the flaws in their ideas. It's just lazy otherwise.
The only thing I can really say to this is, is before Milo was big he was literally untouchable by normal means of arguing much in the same way Trump did it through his campaign. It was endless deflections, attacks on character, etc. (trolling stuff). The issue was that his speech began to gain traction, and what used to be words slowly began to trickle into action by his following. His speech wasn't defeated because we finally convinced him of common sense, it was just the people controlling his ability to speak took it from him. If you want to talk about quashing his speech, look at him right now. He lost his status, his job, good portions of his base, some of his outlets for speaking. All of those are essentially people taking active roles to stop the dude from speaking whether it be at a conference, in a book, or on a website.
If Berkley was the first you heard of Milo, you probably aren't part of one of the identifiable groups he's sent his followers against over the past few years. I've known about him since some time around when he decided to start heckling trans students in universities. I'm glad I live in a country where the idea of absolute freedom of speech is seen as what it is: an excuse to abuse minorities and marginalized groups.
This one cuts deep. I just (like 15 minutes ago) found that one of my childhood best friends who I haven't seen in at least a decade is avidly supporting Trump on facebook. This kid grew up in the middle of San Francisco to the most Hippy parents you could have, but he is the glowing image of disenfranchisement if you look at him now, or if you had glanced at him any time in the past 10-or-so years. It's an odd experience.
I can totally understand their position, despite disagreeing with them with the vehemence of a moon kissing it's parent planet. Things like Gamersgate and the rise of SJWs has done a lot to alienate people in my demographic, and the way these things have been presented has been very one-sided, with toxic communities on Reddit and Tumblr highlighting any extreme opinion shown by the opposition; so you end up with a stream of people spewing hate about things you feel passionate about and the real issues and discussion that needs to be had gets silenced or bastardised. Is Gamersgate about ethical integrity in gaming journalism, or a targeted and personal attack against prominent women in gaming? I still do not know. That doesn't even touch upon the issues of race, LGBTQ, classism, immigration and whatever other butchered narrative they have been selling us for years. Oh, but look, here's a well established (read: why won't it just die already) group of self-styled new media that is ready and eager to call out the traditional murdoch-owned news corporations, and their pbviously bought and paid for politicians. Oh, and Wikileaks doesn't have an agenda it's just super easy to get incriminating stuff on the Clintons... Yeah, it's no wonder Trump and Breitbart and Milo Shutuppayourfacopolis have seen a lot of success Urgh.
Finally got around to reading this, and yes to pretty much everything in the article. As soon as the news broke that was the first question I asked everyone, "Why now?" Favorite part is the end. While the story is pretty tragic, I struggle to connect/care about their situation. Immaturity is no excuse for the serious harm they've done.What will his Lost Boys do now they have outlived their usefulness? Somebody might offer them a teat to run back to, but it won’t be me. I’m done. That whining noise you can hear is a string symphony of the world’s tiniest violins. I think they’re playing Wagner.
I also have a difficult time feeling bad for these privileged fools who are acting as useful idiots for the rise of fascism. It's unfortunate that in all their alienation they haven't developed more class consciousness. Perhaps all their youthful angst and energy could be directed towards productive ends.
I suspect that many have tried and were rebuffed. In undergrad I was rebuffed more than once because 'cis-white men can't be of any value as allies except as audience members and patrons' Which I took to mean 'fuck you, shut up and pay me.' That's an actual quote by the way. I only heard that specific phrasing once, but when I tried to have more serious discussion with people supposedly interested in 'equality' that rhetoric was what I got back.
I've been wondering where the hell everyone gets all these articles from to keep the feed going on Hubski... Sorta meta, but topical if I got this right: People follow writers rather than papers or (generally) news outlets? In this case, you have a personalized feed of stories from different news sources' writers you follow sent to, say, your email account. You sift through them and post here? My usual source for information comes from here or reddit. Given the smaller sample size of posters here (even smaller for certain tags), I hadn't figured it out until now... if I got that right in the first block of text.
Gotta find reputable sources to scan. Really, that's the magic. I have Hubski, The Daily Beast (Cheats page), Vox.com, BoingBoing (they are totally nutty, but they link to sources religiously), The Economist, The Two-Way (NPR's version of the Daily Beast's Cheat page), etc. And then I regularly check reputable news sources like Bloomberg, Reuters, The Guardian, The Independent (RIP), and BBC World News. You also gotta check in on the the enemy and see what they are saying. So I read The Week, The Federalist, anything put out by the Heritage Foundation, and other frothing loons.
I see. Thanks for this. I signed up and "subbed" to the journalist so I see it in my inbox to get me going. So you manually go through the sites rather than having some news platform/hub in one place to look at (aside from Cheat pages, which are dank as fuck, awesome tip).
Yeah, I do it manually. Subscribing to a feed means you get a narrowed list of "articles of interest to you". And I'm sorry, but no fucking algorithm is smart enough to know what is going to "interest" me. My interests are broad-ranging. Wide and deep. So yeah, page through 6 or 7 key sites' front pages. Look for articles written by certain names. Do it 2-3 times a day, and it takes maybe 10 minutes to get through and maintain on top of stuff. Practice. Habit. Etc.
You weren't kidding, she's amazing.The one grown man on the bus started yelling at them to go the hell to sleep — “there’s a girl back there!”—and they yelled back that they’d let me sleep if I let them “suck my titties.” It’s no surprise to hear that they’re still yearning for the teat, but these babies had best be careful where they go slobbering for the milk of human kindness. I’m just about dried up.