In a quote often attributed to Voltaire, he said, “I do not agree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” It is a creed I have long lived by, believing that preventing someone from being able to speak is far more dangerous than any idea they can espouse.
I read a quote from Noam Chomsky that gets close to my thinking – “If we don’t believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don’t believe in it at all.” The same could be said for free speech – it is easy to fight for the free speech for those we support, but that’s not the real test. The real test of free speech is those screaming at the top of their lungs something that you oppose with every ounce of your being – will you fight for them?
For me the answer is yes, which is exactly why I will fight for the repugnant views of Milo Yiannopoulos to be heard. I do not like the ideas of the students protesting his speech to be belittled, they are sincere and deeply-rooted beliefs that should be heard. That is why I intentionally did not comment on the substance of their letter yesterday.
But today I will. I don’t agree that his speech should be canceled. That is not going to make his ideas go away. If anything, it will force them underground and, for too long in the last eight years, we have relegated the views of the alt-right to the fringes of the internet and society – where, unconfronted, they were allowed to fester and grow.
The problem here is that is exactly what he wants to happen. He is intentionally coming to liberal university campuses and wants to demonstrate the intolerance of the left by generating protests and efforts to shut him down.
The act of protest, the attempts to shut him down make his voice grow louder. I actually think the best response would have been to ignore him completely. But that hasn’t happened.
“Students aren’t used to hearing alternative points of view,” Mr. Yiannopoulos wrote in an email to Inside Higher Ed. “That has been the case for a decade or more. It enrages them that not only do I make evidence-based arguments and consistently beat them on the rare occasion they show up, but I do so with style, sass, and my trademark humility.
“If you don’t want to come to a Milo Yiannopoulos lecture, don’t come. But you have no right to deny others the chance to,” he wrote. Aside from a “tiny minority” of “social justice warriors,” he continued, “pretty much everyone else agrees with at least some of what I’m saying, because they recognize that, for example, feminism hurts women as much as it hurts men and they are mystified that feminists are unwilling/incapable of defending their wacky positions.”
He is exactly correct here – tactically speaking. People are not used to hearing alternative points of view. There have been articles that have demonstrated that the social media phenomena have done more to bifurcate and segregate views that anything.
On the other hand, the man has some pretty whacky views himself. The idea that feminism hurts women is certainly his right to believe. Openly advocating that men flush their partners’ contraceptives down the toilet is just weird. Here is an article where he argues “Birth Control Makes Women Unattractive and Crazy.”
Twitter permanently banned him as it cracked down on his targeting of Leslie Jones, the actress in “Ghostbusters.” But you have to wonder, as the Washington Post reported, “Reactions to Yiannopoulos’s suspension fell along the lines you’d expect: His supporters — he had more than 300,000 followers at the time of his suspension — rallied behind the #FreeMilo hashtag, which trended in the United States for several hours, and said that he’d done nothing wrong. Many others cheered Twitter’s decision to ban someone whose mocking, trollish tweets about people on the alt-right’s bad side were often the prelude to a mob of abuse.”
The ban probably only made Milo stronger, although, you can hardly blame Twitter for not wanting their platform to be used to abuse someone in the way it appears Mr. Yiannopoulos did.
So what is the best remedy here to a guy who enjoys getting attention, and takes pride in flipping his middle finger to the establishment?
The best response here would be to allow him to speak, and ignore him. He craves attention, don’t give it to him.
The second best response would be to allow him to speak and offer a counter-measure. Attack his ideas.
The worst response is to attempt to ban him and give him the attention that he craves.
It is not the answer that some people want – I get it. But, then again, I did not support shutting down N.W.A. and Ice-T for their anti-police raps. Or Tipper Gore putting warning labels on my music albums in the late 1980s. Efforts to shut down offensive music did not work. Efforts to shut down offensive alt-right speakers will not work either.
At the same time, taking the high ground has its virtues. The letter notes, “We, the undersigned students, faculty, staff, and alumni, strongly object to the Davis College Republican’s invitation to host Milo Yiannopoulos at UC Davis on January 13th…”
They continue, “Milo Yiannopoulos is well known for his espousal of racist, sexist, and islamophobic hate speech targeted towards numerous members of our campus community.”
Instead of DEMANDING “that campus administrators and the Davis College Republicans cancel this event” and arguing, “The use of campus facilities and resources to host and therefore legitimize a white nationalist runs completely counter to the stated goals of the University of California and serves as a direct threat towards traditionally marginalized groups on campus,” they should have turned this on the College Republicans.
They should have said something like we are appalled that the College Republicans would ask a man who has espoused racist and sexist views to speak at UC Davis. Is that what the College Republicans stand for?
By doing that, the issue would not be about free speech, the issue would be about guilt by association. The weak link here is the College Republicans – is this man what they are about? I await their answer.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
Just because a group invites a speaker on campus doesn’t mean that they necessarily agree with them on every issue they might espouse. I listened to a couple of Yianno’s videos on Youtube yesterday and he does make some good points. I don’t agree with everything he says just as the college Republicans probably don’t either.
David, do you think that all the far left speakers that are invited onto campus totally represent the ideals of the group that invited them? I don’t remember you ever calling any of them out. Let’s be honest here, this is all about shutting down right wing speech.
Thank you for your article that his speech should not be shut down.
I think it would be a fair question to ask the inviters whether they support the message of the speaker. I can tell you as editor of the Vanguard, I often seek out opposing viewpoints to write pieces on here. And of course there are speaker series that espouse different views. But the College Republicans play a different role and I haven’t seen an explanation from them as to their purpose
Here’s the Executive Board. They’re all on Facebook.
Davis College Republicans
DCR has officially appointed a new Executive Director: Andrew Mendoza. He will join the rest of DCR’s 2016-2017 Executive Board that was elected earlier this Summer. Therefore, DCR’s current Board is as follows:
Chair: Nicholas Francois
Vice Chair: Gabrielle McDowell
Communications Director: Kurtie Kellner
Political Director: Deborah Porter
Treasurer: Atanas Spasov
Secretary: Steve An
Executive Director: Andrew Mendoza
“Here’s the Executive Board. They’re all on Facebook.”
I would love to hear their thoughts on their goals in making this invitation. Perhaps someone who actually uses Facebook ( which I do not although I do have an account) could reach out to them and post any responses here on the Vanguard.
No wonder why they like to see Milo .
David wrote:
> I haven’t seen an explanation from them as to their purpose
Did you ask them (or were you waiting for them to come to your office to explain).
When I was an AS exec. I often “invited” B list metal bands to campus that sang about the devil as well as B list rap groups that talked about killing cops. My purpose was not to “support” “devil worship” or “cop killing” but to fill seats in the on campus venue and make money for AS.
SOD
I agree that an invitation does not equal agreement on all points. However, I would question your judgement or motive in inviting groups that talk about “killing cops” unless in a negative and discouraging fashion, just as I question the motive of inviting intemperate promotion of right wing ideas.
I see this as exploitation of deliberately harmful ideas for profit which I find distasteful regardless of which side is doing it. Not meeting the criteria for a ban, but certainly worthy of criticism.
Tia, the tickets to this event are free.
So who is paying him to come here?
I don’t know but obviously the college Republicans aren’t doing it for profit.
For the record, he apparently claims he doesn’t charge a speaker’s fee.
“It enrages them that not only do I make evidence-based arguments and consistently beat them on the rare occasion they show up, but I do so with style, sass, and my trademark humility.
I have read multiple articles and watched several of MY’s tapes and was unable to identify anything that he said that was “evidence based”. Of course, since I am a doctor and he is not, I recognize that we may hold different standards for what constitutes “evidence”.
I am wondering if BP who has stated,”I listened to a couple of Yianno’s videos on Youtube yesterday and he does make some good points.” would be willing to share what you see as the “good points” that he has made.
David wrote:
> It is a creed I have long lived by believing that preventing
> someone from being able to speak is far more dangerous
> than any idea they can espouse.
It sounds like David, Tia and myself think this way but there are quite a few people on the left that want to stop anyone to the right of Tom Campbell or Ed Zschau (two super moderate pro-choice Republicans that I worked for in the 80’s) from speaking on a college campus, just like there are quite a few people on the right that would kick kids out of school that even “talked” about flag burning (and want to “force” Colin Kappernick to stand and sing along with the national anthem).
> He is intentionally coming to liberal university campuses
> and wants to demonstrate the intolerance of the left
Did Tia use her ESP to tell you why he decided to come to Davis? I agree that there is a good chance that is what he is doing but unless he told me (or I had a friend with ESP that knows what others are thinking) I would write “I think he might be coming…”
> I actually think the best response would have been to ignore him completely.
So do I, can you let us know why a guy who thinks the “best response would have been to ignore him completely” decided to headline his blog for yet another day with a story about a guy who according to the UCD kids that don’t want him to speak “is well known for his espousal of racist, sexist, and islamophobic hate speech targeted towards numerous members of our campus community.”?
I thought his quote spoke for itself on that issue, no?
SOD
“Did Tia use her ESP to tell you why he decided to come to Davis?”
You were making a good point right up until you decided that you had to invoke the snark. You post this despite the fact that on previous threads I have stated repeatedly that I have no idea ( indeed can’t even imagine) what the Republican group was thinking when they invited him. Perhaps you do not realize that your posts would have much more impact ( as would mine) without the snark, especially when it is directly countered by the “evidence”.
Tia wrote:
> You were making a good point right up until you
> decided that you had to invoke the snark.
When you and David stop telling us why people do things or what they are thinking I’ll stop joking about it.
> I suggest that you start by Googling “white supremacists
> celebrate Trump win”.
If you Google “black panthers celebrate Obama win” you will also get a lot of hits (and Obama is no more a Black Panther supporter than Trump is a white supremacist). In most major cities criminal street gangs (of all races) identify with different sports teams (and wear there “colors”) yet the sports teams have nothing to do with the criminals that like them…
SOD
“When you and David stop telling us why people do things or what they are thinking I’ll stop joking about it.”
If you will quote any post of mine in which I have told “us why people do things or what they are thinking…” then I will be able to clarify. I know that you can find examples in which I have asked people if I was correct in my interpretation of their thinking. However, anyone who has achieved a third grade reading level in English can tell that the presence of “?” indicates a question, while the presence of a “.” indicates a declaration or assertion. I write the words that I write with my punctuation. I am not responsible for your inference of what I mean.
“ff you Google “black panthers celebrate Obama win” you will also get a lot of hits”
When a member of the black panthers is invited to campus to speak, I am sure that I would have something to say about that as well and if they were promoting reproductive sabotage and/or limitation of women in STEM fields, I am quite sure that I would take exactly the same stance as I am taking with MY’s invitation.
Really, you’ve lived in Davis for a long time, did you speak out when Angela Davis spoke on campus?
https://www.ucdavis.edu/news/angela-davis-remaking-world
Tia wrote:
> If you will quote any post of mine in which I have told
> “us why people do things or what they are thinking…”
> then I will be able to clarify.
Here you tell us what Frakkly’s world view is:
“Because of course, in the world according to Frankly, you know better than they “what they really are about” and because in the world according to Frankly, there are no nuances, only tribes with no cross over and no complexity….”
https://davisvanguard.org/2016/04/katehi-put-on-investigative-leave/
> they were promoting reproductive sabotage
I’m wondering if Tia is aware that millions of people (including most conservative/orthodox Jews and Catholics) like Milo are opposed to birth control?
I’m not a conservative Jew or Catholic, but I’ve heard that the last few Popes (speaking in front of crowds with thousands of people) have agreed with Milo on birth control.
Since I’m personally “pro choice on everything” I’ll let women make their own decisions on birth control but don’t feel the need to call Milo some kind of crazy for having the same view on birth control as many world religious leaders and millions of Americans.
Germaine Greer, once an Icon of the feminist movement, has been “no platformed” in the UK.
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/nov/18/transgender-activists-protest-germaine-greer-lecture-cardiff-university
Like I stated yesterday I had never heard of Yiannopolis before our local liberals started having a hissy fit over him talking on campus. So I’ve done a little research and watched a couple of his video speeches. I see the typical cries of white nationalism and racist coming from the left and maybe I need to do more research but I honestly haven’t seen any truth to that. In one of the videos, after the speech, a reporter filmed the students and asked them about their accusing him of being a racist and to give some examples. They couldn’t come up with any.
BP
“Like I stated yesterday I had never heard of Yiannopolis before”
I am sure this is true. I had not heard of him prior to GamerGate. However, I would like to point out that our previous ignorance of his activities does not mean that he was not knowingly creating a great deal of harm to the GhostBusters actress and her family in the form of threats of rape and death from his followers. This is reminiscent of the pizza shop shooting in which the shooter decided that he needed to personally “investigate” the claims of HRC running a child sex ring out of this completely legitimate business. The words of our leaders, entertainers and self styled provocateurs do matter and can become dangerous as this act showed.
“I see the typical cries of white nationalism and racist coming from the left and maybe I need to do more research…”
The research isn’t difficult to do. I suggest that you start by Googling “white supremacists celebrate Trump win”. The second entry is a link to a well attended speech by white nationalist R. Spencer. Please take a few minutes to listen to his speech questioning whether those who are on the political left are “even human” at all, watch the Nazi style salutes and then tell me whether or not you believe that this is actually happening. I suggested this before, but it would appear from your comment that you see no evidence that this is occurring that perhaps you did not get around to it.
Yiannopolous has addressed that, he’s not responsible for what others might say or write. I see the hate now coming from the left towards Trump, should we blame HRC for all the ugly comments and threats directed towards him?
Here you go again projecting onto Yiannoplous what someone else has said or done. Give me examples of racism coming from Yainnopolous himself, not what someone else has said.
You seem to doing some real stretches here.
In fact if you watch the video below Yiannopolous says he doesn’t identify with the alt-right. His own words. Watch the video with an open mind, you might learn something.
I think Tia you have fallen victim that comes from the left when they despise someone that doesn’t fit their P.C. world by branding them with white nationalism, racism, etc. [fill in the blank]
BP
“Yiannopolous has addressed that, he’s not responsible for what others might say or write.”
I know that he has disavowed the actions of his on line followers. However, if I , as a doctor tell women that birth control pills, IUDs and implants do not work, and they believe me and do not use them, do I not have any responsibility for the ensuing pregnancies ? I would say that I was indirectly responsible for these outcomes and would own it. I believe that Yiannopoulos as an obviously intelligent individual who knows exactly what he is doing and is choosing to lead others down a predictable path to threats of violence intended to be harmful and continued to do so long after this effect was pointed out to him.
“Here you go again projecting onto Yiannoplous what someone else has said or done. “
I projected nothing on to Yiannopoulos. I merely provided you with an example of actual white supremacists celebrating the election results on a thread regarding Yiannopoulos. Nowhere did I claim he was in the room, agreed with them nor promoted their group. My post was directly prompted by your statement that you did not see these kinds of actions occurring.
Okay, I can see where you got that out of my wording. What I meant was I haven’t seen any truth to that occurring when it comes to Yiannopolous’ views or speeches.
http://www.vox.com/2016/7/20/12226070/milo-yiannopoulus-twitter-ban-explained
Does this guy really rise to the threshold of deserving to be banned?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lgl53EXInPc
BP
“Does this guy really rise to the threshold of deserving to be banned?”
If this were the only side of “this guy” that is being promoted, I would agree with you that it does not. However, I certainly believe that the other side, the side that depicts women and other races as inferior ( as in not worthy of places in the STEM fields and should be excluded from them, not able to decide what medicines they should be able to use, and not having “our values” with regard to immigrants) is dangerous and while I do not believe his speech should be banned, I do believe that it should not be trivialized and should consistently be called out for the hate mongering that it is.
I would like to call to the attention of all Vanguard readers, two articles from today’s Enterprise that I think really bring home the full implications of the type of speech we are discussing and its intended and perhaps unintended consequences at the local as well as national level.
The articles are “KKK disavows white supremacist label” and “Davis police make hate-crime arrest” and can be found on the second page of today’s Enterprise directly beneath Bob Dunning’s column.
“Does this guy really rise to the threshold of deserving to be banned?”
Of course not–not if one understands and values the First Amendment.
But it’s important to understand that Yiannopolous is in demand as a speaker because he is the appealing and personable face of the alt-right. He is skilled at putting a positive spin on what is a white nationalist, xenophobic, Islamophobic, sexist faction of the far right. The videos merely show that he’s good at what he does, not that his message is benign.
Did you watch the above video?
He states he doesn’t identify with the alt-right.
Which supports my point–he’s good at what he does.
So if the man says he doesn’t identify with a group that doesn’t count?
BP wrote:
> So if the man says he doesn’t identify
> with a group that doesn’t count?
Once (crazy) far left or (crazy) far right brand someone there is nothing they can do to change that (many on the far left still call Trump a “birther” and many on the far right still call Obama a “Muslim born in Kenya”…
I often laugh at (crazy) far left or (crazy) far right talk about “code words” saying things like he said “working class” but that was just a “code word” for “Hispanics”…
To some degree, this occurs on a daily basis, in the Vanguard comments section.
I have no problem shutting down faux facts, aka “lies”/untruths.
hpierce: As I’ve previously noted, your role in doing so is appreciated.
Thx… on the “opinion” side, I do have some hot buttons, so sometimes behave badly.
SOD
“When you and David stop telling us why people do things or what they are thinking I’ll stop joking about it.”
If you will quote any post of mine in which I have told “us why people do things or what they are thinking…” then I will be able to clarify. I know that you can find examples in which I have asked people if I was correct in my interpretation of their thinking. However, anyone who has achieved a third grade reading level in English can tell that the presence of “?” indicates a question, while the presence of a “.” indicates a declaration or assertion. I write the words that I write with my punctuation. I am not responsible for your inference of what I mean.
“ff you Google “black panthers celebrate Obama win” you will also get a lot of hits”
When a member of the black panthers is invited to campus to speak, I am sure that I would have something to say about that as well and if they were promoting reproductive sabotage and/or limitation of women in STEM fields, I am quite sure that I would take exactly the same stance as I am taking with MY’s invitation.
>To some degree, this occurs on a daily basis, in the Vanguard comments section.
How so?
BP
“He states he doesn’t identify with the alt-right.”
He makes a lot of claims that aren’t true. Such as women are unfit to pursue STEM careers. He uses this obvious untruth to advocate for rationing slots in STEM fields for women. He claims that birth control pills make women fat and crazy and uses this to promote contraceptive interference with the increase in risk of unintended pregnancy increasing from less than 80-90 % to an 80 % chance of conception in the reproductive age range over all. So if he is willing to tell these blatant lies, are we supposed to believe him when he says ( with a wind and a nod) that he doesn’t identify with the alt-right.
Tia wrote:
> Such as women are unfit to pursue STEM careers.
Can you post a link where he says or writes “women are unfit to pursue STEM careers”?
I did a Google search and found a quotes where he says (nothing that says “women are unfit to pursue STEM careers”):
“Encouraging women to take leadership and technical roles in technology, the Internet and gaming, if they want them, is a noble goal.”
and
“There are highly technical subjects totally dominated by women: veterinary science, for example.”
and
“Women who can in tech don’t need to get by on their gender, and they are often the first people to push social climbers and weak performers out so they don’t have to be judged by them. “
SOD
Here is one. I posted a separate link to another article by MY on Breibart on a previous thread. On the link below he asserts that he feels that women should be limited in their pursuit not only of the “harder” STEM areas but also in medicine. I seem to be having some problems with linking, but you can just Google “Yiannopoulos and women in STEM” and you will find an assortment of his writings on this subject.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/06/15/heres-why-there-ought-to-be-a-cap-on-women-studying-science-and-maths/
People say lots of crazy stuff. For example Jerry Brown has said many times that other kids should get more money for their schools than my kids should. Yet I don’t see JB being reviled here.
I’ll just say this, if this man gets shut down it will be an ugly day for UC Davis and because of its location the City of Davis.
Nice advertisement for the show
https://www.eventbrite.com/e/milo-yiannopoulos-at-uc-davis-tickets-29394535848
Truly, Jerry, thank you for the factual information.
It appears that although the CR’s are requesting folk to consider donations, it is not a “fund-raiser” per se, as it states it is a free event… still curious what the speaker’s fee, inc. “expenses” is…
Am starting to think this guy is a Rush Limbaugh type… out to get attention and money, but whose business plan is playing to a ‘niche market’. And is using media controversy for free advertising…
hpierce
Milo is a parody of Gertrude Stein . The view he represents did not come from nowhere . This is a great possibility that his father was or is a Greek nationalist and he is associated with Nikolaos Michaloliakos who is the Greek leader of the Neo-Fascist Party Golden Dawn, with seats in the Greek Parliament. The party is nostalgic for Nazism:
Perhaps Milo is associated with Georgios Karatzaferis, a well-known Greek politician and journalist in Europe and former member of European Parliament. Georgios Karatzaferis is a leader of the Popular Orthodox Rally or People’s Orthodox Alarm, abbreviated as LAOS. On different controversial remarks, Georgios Karatzaferis has publicly questioned why Jews did not “come to work on 9/11,” suggesting that they were warned to leave the World Trade Center prior to the attack. He challenged the Israeli ambassador in Greece to come and debate on “the Holocaust, the Auschwitz and Dachau myth” and in 2001 he stated that “the Jews have no legitimacy to speak in Greece and provoke the political world. The logos for both parties are interesting. LAOS’s logos are closely akin to the KKK’s logo and the Golden Dawn Party Logo is similar to the swastika. Historically, ideologies like fascism and communism are deeply rooted in Greece.
>Am starting to think this guy is a Rush Limbaugh type
Actually he sounds a lot like Donald Trump: saying outrageous things that some people take seriously. That of course is a bit more serious when one is a leader the country.
True (to an extent… have not and may not hear what Milos has to say… very rarely listened to Limbaugh, either)… but at least we have separation of powers… my hope is the system is fine, even with this…
Not sure if the president elect even has strong support within his own party… much less Democrats… time will tell…
How the left is treating speakers on campus:
First they came for the Jewish speakers, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the right wing speakers, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a right winger.
Then they came for the left wing speakers—and there was no one left to speak for me.
BP
I am not quite sure why DV is participant to shut down this event . It looks like that the war is about nothing.
Jerry, the DV doesn’t want to shut it down.
David has stated several times he’s for free speech.
BP
What is this solicitation about? To give us opportunity to kill time because we have nothing better to do than fight about the Milo’s “To be or not to be ” ?
Jerry, I will say one thing though. There’s a few commenters who claim they’re for free speech and not shutting him down but their comments say something altogether different.
@ BP… you wrote,
Honest question… do you feel refutation of facts, and/or rebutting opinions are against free speech principles?
It was just my opinion, now my opinion can be rebutted, I have no problem with that.
Let him talk and forget about IT . He spoke already in UCLA and sky did not fell.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpPIFhdOJj0 ADELE
Madame Curie, Rosalind Franklin, Lise Meitner and Davis’ own Carol Grieder and Katherine Esau disprove his argument about women in stem.
“The weak link here is the College Republicans – is this man what they are about?”
Exactly.
David, I agree with you on this article 100%.
DECEMBER 10, 2016 5:57 PM
Milo Yiannopoulos: ‘White supremacist Nazi’ or no-holds-barred truth-teller?
http://www.sanluisobispo.com/news/local/article120214933.html
Well done article on the VG. It is example of critical-thinking and introspective blog journalism.
The UCD campus like many campuses in the US are ideologically-corrupt left “leaning” environments that used to be simply learning environments. Frankly, (because I am), the standard campus speech-control agenda is absolute proof that the thing we call liberal-progressivism is really totalitarianism and probably even infantile fascism. It is a baby wolf in sheep’s clothing. It connects to the adult wolf that is present in the main stream media and the elite establishment as a strategy specifically targeting the pursuit of wealth.
Reading the Davis Enterprise this morning, I was reminded of “the large problem” that resulted in the another possible problem (or possibly a remedy of the former) of a Trump presidency.
That large problem is ideological segregation.
Within the Enterprise there is a second page story (probably would have been first-page before the election) “KKK Disavows White-Supremacist Label”; a Forum section article from a gay college student at the University of Virginia expressing his heightened fears following the election; a letter titled “An interfaith pledge to protect the right of all” that starts with a paragraph ending with “recognize and acknowledge the anxiety and concerns in the wake of the 2016 election.” And then the standard unhinged rants from Debra DeAngelo about the liberal media and Democrat Party’s new excuse for being trounced for the last six years being caused by “fake news”.
One of my super smart millennial employees who, while the election results were coming in and was causing a need for more drinks to be ordered, was with me at a work conference in San Francisco where we were with a group of people having drinks in a 46-floor bar with 360-degree views of the city… recently shared with me a report from the Rand corporation “Russian Firehouse of Falsehood“. The report is basically a deep conspiracy explanation of Russia manipulating and controlling the American political direction and outcomes using Cold War propaganda methods on modern social media steroids. My millennial employee sent it to me with the following comment:
Read that last sentence and ask yourself how we got to this point where a super smart millennial would ask the question.
I did some research on RAND corporation to see if there might be a link to their own ideological bias… basically making a case that THEY might be the propaganda tool making up this story about Russia.
And finding this made the hair stand up on the back of my neck: http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2011/03/03/think-tank-employees-tend-to-support-democrats
It demonstrates what I have noted over the years… that leftists have infiltrated most of the institutions of influence… education, media and now the think tanks.
The rejection of certain speakers on campus isn’t just the snowflake students demanding their safe-spaces. It is a manifestation of a few decades of work of the disciples of left-ism to win the biggest prize in the history of man kind… the Great Experiment called the United States of America.
And in consideration of this, it is highly likely that Russia HAS been playing a part… to ultimately help the leftists win and weaken the global defenses against collectivism… the defenses that only the US has historically be able to adequately provide.
Frankly
Milo is European Fascism, communism and extreme nationalism ideologies are deeply rooted in European landscape. The today’s America KKK , the Neo-nazis , the white supremacist groups are farces and comic parodies from from the Mel Brooks ‘To be or not to be ” movie in comparison to Europeans right wingers and Neo-nazis groups. Their presence should not be ignored but it is not the same as in Europe . The post colonial America successfully neutralized political extremism and I don’t see any signs on the horizon that the White House would be occupied by fascist or communists in near future .
Jerry
I appreciate your points here, but there is a slippery slope. Just check out Argentina.
Maybe you can define political extremism, because from a context of what I understand post-colonial America to be, Bernie Sanders was a political extremist.
Donald Trump is much more a traditionalist with respect to American social, economic and ideological orientation.
Liberal-progressiveness does not seek some state of being, it never stops attempting to “progress” and thus marches through totalitarianism and then ultimately to forms of collectivism.
My point is that if you are a communist leader you first note that the US is the only country to hold back your imperial expansion agenda. You would also note that the strength of the US has been its national sovereignty and lack of tribalism that plaques every other ethnically-diverse nation… and you would set out to help create more divisions within the various tribes. You would have great understanding of the impulses and reactionary tendencies of those people wired with leftist/progressive tendencies and seek to expand their numbers because their tendencies are to reject traditions over hypersensitivity to “fairness” conditions… while also pursuing their own advantage for a greater piece of the resource pie through looting rather than production. In other words, these people have a tendency of constant destruction of the good in pursuit of the ever elusive and unattainable perfect utopia.
In this way, American AND European liberal progressives are the manipulable internal destruction tool of China and Russia.
My question… is Trump one of them, or an indication that American democracy once again pulled the country back from the brink of that slippery slope of decline that killed other successful market-based democracies? There is Brexit and Italy, and France… it appears that even these democracies are working to stop the slide.
But then again, maybe it is only a diversion.
Frankly
“Donald Trump is much more a traditionalist with respect to American social, economic and ideological orientation.”
And I would say that anyone who believes this is not counting his actions, but only listening to his words, many of which have as demonstrated on tapes of him speaking have been demonstrated to be lies.
Do you consider it a traditionalist value to cheat on your wife ? The president elect did this.
Do you consider “kitty” grabbing to be a traditionalist value ? The president elect did this or at least bragged that he had done so.
Do you consider the belief the German “blood” is superior to be a traditionalist view ? The president elect has been on tape ( as previously linked) saying precisely this.
Do you believe that allegedly cheating students out of their money in a dubious “university” scheme which he first said he would not settle the resulting lawsuit based on “principle” and after being elected decided perhaps principle was not so important after all to be reflective of traditional American values ?
Do you consider it a traditionalist view to manipulate the system so as to personally profit from bankruptcy and debt ( remember “I love debt”) with the full understanding that others will suffer from your actions ?
These are just a few of the actions ( demonstrable, not made up by some left wing spin artist) that you are attributing to this man who you call “much more traditional”. If this is what you consider to be traditional and what you are defending, then I think that we are in much more trouble than even I would have expected.
And, for the local tie in, I have no idea what MY believes. But I do know that he has a profound effect on those that follow him on social media, that he knows this, and that he chooses to continue despite the real harm to the lives of others as in the threats made to the GhostBusters star and her family and to the women involved in GamerGate. I agree that he made no direct threats himself. But to deny that his words are being used to deliberately stir up those who do engage in those activities is duplicitous to say the least.
Yes. FDR and JFK to name a few.
Yes. FDR and JFK to name a few. And for a traditionalist (and realist) there is a large percentage of woman that have no problem with this type of behavior from men… and actually are attracted to it. Do you live in a post-modern Victorian prudish sexuality world?
You need to provide cites for this because I have never hear it. But yes, do you want me to also provide cites of things FDR and JFK said during their political careers?
Give me a break. You are really scraping the barrel to come up with junk to support your Trump-hating position. Do you want to get back to how the Kennedy family made all their riches?
This bit just demonstrates the cognitive dissonance in the left narrative for Trump hating. The effing tax code is the effing tax code. Do you pay more than you have to Tia? Do you not or have you not taken advantage of the mortgage deduction for your real estate holdings? What about charitable deductions… do you not put those on your 1040 to reduce your overall tax payment liability?
Bankruptcy laws and the ability for capital investment losses to offset future gains has been a tenant of corporate tax code for decades. It was put into place to encourage risk-taking that results in economic growth that creates jobs and allows people to make a living so they can afford the inflated cost of healthcare that your profession continues to inflate. Why don’t you work for no pay to help care for all the sick people in the nation?
If you invest $100 and lose $100, when you next gain $100 you can use the previous losses to offset your tax payment liability so that you report $0 gain.
But if you then make another $100 you will pay the full tax liability on that $100.
What is so hard for you to accept here?
Until you give up all of your pay and assets to give to the government except what you need to support a substance level you are hypocritical to criticize others for not giving up more of their earnings to the government.
There is a difference between behavior and values. Donald Trump is not a role model for anyone. His behavior is repellent. In his personal life and his behavior as a businessman, he does not reflect the American values I was raised with.
All of Tia’s facts(?) sounds like it comes straight from the DailyKos
Explain this because it does not make any sense. My perspective is that those with a left leaning political orientation often incapable of assessing the true character of a character for the words they say. This is what Trump used to his advantage. He set Democrats hair on fire to distract them from the true battle they needed to fight.
This really gets to a key tenant of competition. If can get the opposition’s emotional engine to boil while you remain calm and measured, you can get them to make tactical errors which you can then exploit.
Talk about role models. What I hear from a lot of people these days is that the left side of politics that they previously considered to hold the higher moral ground has collapsed into an example of the ugliest type of American they have every seen. The Democrat brand suffered bigly over the last six years, but that damage exploded after the election and continues exploding today.
>Yes. FDR and JFK to name a few.
Frank Lee, how did you forget Brother Bill?
Alan wrote:
> Frank Lee, how did you forget Brother Bill?
Are you talking about our 42nd President who the Republicans attempted to smear with a “vast right wing conspiracy”?
Ran out of ink for a while.
@ frankly (because he is)…
So, who is the owner of competition, and what is the rent they charge? Or are you in a process of ‘dumbing down’ … the far right and far left seem to trending that way…
Or, was it just a typo? Mispelling? [misspelling intended]
Typo. Meant tenet. Thanks for the catch.
Watch the playoffs for almost all professional sports. By the way, Trump was a gifted athlete growing up. I am sure it explains some of his drive to win.
Frankly
“The UCD campus like many campuses in the US are ideologically-corrupt left “leaning” environments that used to be simply learning environments.”
What you fail to mention is that for most Americans at least through the 1970’s when I graduated high school, the entire public school system could have accurately been characterized as an ideologically-corrupt right “leaning” environment with historical portrayals of essentially only white men as the heroes of our national story, blithely ignoring ( for the most part) the contributions of women and minorities to our national accomplishments. Also largely ignored were the contributions to world culture of Asians, Egyptians, Africans and Middle Easterners although many of these contributions fully equally those of westerners. As far as most of us were concerned the only religion portrayed at all was some version of Christianity. We said the pledge of allegiance with the “under God” phrase without question.
And yet none of this ever seems to rise for you to the level of “brainwashing” even though it was performed at much more suggestible and malleable ages than the college age students who are not subjected to leftist professors involuntarily, but actually have to sign up for these types of courses which are quite easy to avoid as I did for the entire three years that I was doing my pre med requirements. I think it is hard to characterize something as “brain washing” as you have done in previous posts, when no one is forced to participate in it.
I think your view here are painted with an extremist brush that is likely influenced by some less than satisfactory experience of feeling accepted during your education years.
Certainly we can point back to a white-male-dominated orientation of history. That is largely justified as white males did most of the work of brain and brawn to create this Great Experiment… the first and most successful country in the history of man that was based on an idea, and not just tribal history. But there was not any overt, top-down, state-sponsored agenda to repress and oppress people not white-male or having traditional conservative views and values. And ultimately we defeated slavery, we passed women’s suffrage and we passed civil rights. All of these things progressed because those white males do despised by American liberals today put the words in our founding documents of governance.
The difference today is that the left pushes an extreme agenda with overt top-down control methods.
In other words, you might have been shouted down by people holding more traditional and conservative views during the time you attended school; but you would not have had the majority of campus officials refusing to let you speak. Big difference.
Frankly
“I think your view here are painted with an extremist brush that is likely influenced by some less than satisfactory experience of feeling accepted during your education years”
And I think that your supposition is laughable. Once again, no one is forced to attend any university, no one is forced to attend any university class……but millions of children have been forced to attend schools that have presented a white, male, Christian view of the world as though it was unquestionable truth.
And no one is forced to attend a Yiannopolous event.
Frankly – You have a very white male perspective on U.S. history.
White males did most of the work because non-whites and non-males were prohibited from participating.
You mean like the non-state-sponsored non-oppression and non-repression of Native Americans, women, non-property owners, and blacks?
Right. Because of liberal movements like abolitionism, the women’s suffrage movement, and civil rights activism, not because of the magnanimity of the white male ruling class.
Actually, they weren’t included in the founding documents. It took the 13th, 14th, 15th, and 19th Amendments to put most of those things in the Constitution.
The founding documents were and are the basis for all of it Eric. Your America and white-male hating is on full display. Maybe some unresolved childhood issues causing you some boiling anger.
You libs are a hoot. Keep going back in history to connect to the present… because the present just does not have enough to validate your narrative.
Do you know of any country that has done better than the US historically for tolerance, inclusion and freedom?
Frankly says above: “And for a traditionalist (and realist) there is a large percentage of woman that have no problem with this type of behavior from men… and actually are attracted to it. ”
How do you know that? Does your wife believe this? Is this how you have taught your sons to behave?
And regarding the German genes comments, just Google: “Trump genes German.”
When I was raised in the 1950’s by my middle-class, Sunday-school teaching, WASP parents they taught me to respect other people and not to be violent toward others – men and women. I was taught to live by the Golden Rule and obey the Ten Commandments. These are what many of us talk about as traditional values. Now you come along and suggest that grabbing women’s genitals without their consent is a “traditional” value? Give me a break. Maybe you should read what you write before you post it. Maybe you should let your children or wife read it.
Oh give me a break. I think his comments were disgusting. But seriously? Do you pay any attention to the big city club scene and pop culture?
I too was raised to never say or do anything like that.
But I have never been a billionaire play boy that has had women flinging themselves at me because of my money and fame.
My wife and most of the secure women and men I know say the same… it was a disgusting thing he said… 10 effing years ago… but nothing close to as concerning as the things that Hillary Clinton said as proved from the WikiLeaks emails. They are also clearly able to note that the unhinged left and media rise to protect a lot of sexual immorality on display and so don’t have any credibility on this other than to just prove they are Trump haters.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dGJIB5cO0cQ
Wow, Tia.. must have been an interesting place where you grew up… I grew up, late 60’s, early 70’s, in the Bay Area, and had one teacher who was far right, one was far left, and one who taught that Huckleberry Finn was a story about homosexuals… while she seduced/banged the HS quarterback… she was in her late 30’s early 40’s…
The rest of the teachers showed no “politics”/slants at all…
Same here Hpierce. Knowing that you lived in San Mateo I had a Social Science teacher at Aragon High School who always talked about the virtues of Socialism and several other teachers who were anything but conservative.
All hail the 1950’s! Where have you been for the last forty years?
Forty? Do the math… the 1950’s were ~ 60 years ago…
Frankly is apparently nostalgic for the 1950’s, a time when I believe he would have been a toddler. He has expressed his admiration for Joe McCarthy.
Admiration for Joe McCarthy? No… just have lamented the loss of counter to the leftist march. But not so much at this point. All of western civilization appears to be rejecting it.
I was born in 1960, but as Hillary Clinton says about the soldiers and diplomat she let die in Benghazi for political reasons “what difference does it make?” I was responding to Tia’s challenge. It was met and she is silent about it.
http://www.mtv.com/news/1927820/presidents-talk-dirty/
— Oct.10, 2010
— Aug. 11, 2011
— Dec. 9, 2011
Feb. 22, 2014
— April 15, 2014
— June 15, 2015.
— Aug. 25, 2015
— May 4, 2016.
Don, so you apparently have a lot of time on your hands.
And it appears to be a waste of time because you haven’t made any point.
McCarthy and others at the time where completely anti-collectivist. My point was and still is that we could have used it as counter to our otherwise seemingly unchecked march toward socialism and communism.
But it seems that we might have stopped it without needing McCarthy. Basically the collectivists got too greedy and got smacked down by the people.
I think you’re reading way more into Trump’s victory than it merits.
Donald Trump did not win some smashing victory with a mandate for conservatism. He didn’t win the popular vote. He eked out narrow victories in the rust belt states that tipped the electoral college. There is nothing in the way he won in those states that suggests the voters want a wholesale dismantling of the federal government or some tide of extreme conservatism. Yet his cabinet appears to have been chosen to that end, reflecting the dominance of Mike Pence in his inner circle.
Milo Yiannopoulos is a representative of the grotesque subculture that bubbled up in the Trump campaign, along with the white supremacists and others. His hallmark has been provocative misogyny and aggressive anti-feminism. If people of his ilk, and Bannon and Spencer and others, aren’t actively disavowed by conservatives and Republicans, that caricature will come to represent the right wing.
If the Republican congress begins to dismantle the social safety net, if Trump listens to the extreme militarists he’s appointing like Flynn and Bolton, if Republicans try to turn back the clock on social issues, and if these outlandish bigots are embraced by groups like the College Republicans and mainstream conservatives, it’s almost a certainty that the pendulum will swing back — if not in 2018, then likely in 2020.
Make people uncomfortable, continue driving off minorities and women, and take away the rights and social protections they expect, and you won’t have a winning formula.
No, just illustrating that, in fact, you have repeatedly expressed admiration for Joe McCarthy, and illustrating the strong penchant for authoritarianism that is a hallmark of Trump supporters like you and Mr. Yiannopoulos.
Don
You don’t know , Frankly does not know , I don’t know and nobody on this forum knows whether McCarthy did more harm than good . I don’t know whether all documents from the MacCarthy ‘s era were declassified and are accessible to the public . However , I experienced and I know how the evil of communist dictatorship works. We don’t know for sure if McCarthy by his “purge doctrine ” did or did not prevent changing the name of the United States of America to the United Socialist States of America .(USSA ) The Stalin’s era ended three years after Stalin’s death in 1956 . This Soviet monster killed millions of people and deported millions of people to gulags in Siberia from other countries which the Soviet Union occupied after WW II. I don’t see that Frankly is sympathizer of the McCarthy’s era but I see that Frankly knows more about the hammer above people heads , the sickle around people necks and the red stars in people eyes .
American communism was based, not on fighting for civil rights or civil liberties, but on support for the political regime created and ruled by Joseph Stalin. The United States vanquished two totalitarian foes in the 20 th century. Any academic who defended Nazism would rightly be regarded with loathing. Those who defend communism and those who served it deserve no better — and no less. That so many American historians, including past presidents of the Organization of American Historians and the American Historical Association, remain willing in the 21 st century to apologize for or ignore the evils of communism and that pointing this out is controversial is, alas, another one of the legacies of Senator Joseph McCarthy.
https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/212053/setting-record-joe-mccarthy-straight-harvey-klehr
https://fellowshipoftheminds.com/2015/02/06/communist-party-admits-infiltration-takeover-of-democratic-party/
Don
Maybe McCarthy caused that you could run your own business today instead of driving car like Cubans are driving today . Enjoy your business . Don’t go red or pink and don’t even think about. The socialism and communism looks only good in communists and socialists propaganda’s books and their evil’s publications. .
Ha! Right.
Don… DONALD TRUMP is our President elect. DONALD TRUMP. How much rejection does it take for voters in 90% of the republic to give the majority nod to DONALD TRUMP?
DONALD TRUMP!
I know that you and other liberals try to grab solace with the narrative of TRUMP being elected by nothing other than vast swatches of US territory sparsely occupied by racists, etc… but that is just deflection of the obvious liberal disappointment and embarrassment for allowing the election to go to DONALD TRUMP.
And Don, did you note the House, the Senate, the state legislatures the state governors? It is a sea of red all perfectly indicative of a rejection of the coastal liberal agenda.
Lastly, did you note the rest of the industrialized world… the same is being bigly rejected.
I think the western slide down toward a liberal-socialist-collectivist new world order has, thankfully, been killed for now.
We don’t need a Joe McCarthy at this point. My faith in the democratic system was previously shaken, but it has been restored.
I see your math skills are rusty.
Present popular vote total:
Clinton:
65,746,532
= 48.2%
Trump:
62,904,649
= 46.2%
I’m not a liberal.
Yes, the red states are sparsely populated. Acreage does not equal votes.
New York, California, and Illinois together have 22% of the US population.
Add in the rest of the Mid-Atlantic states and New England, and Oregon and Washington, and you have 42% of the US population.
We don’t now, didn’t then, and never will. Again, though, your fondness for authoritarianism shines through.
Two Republican presidents in a row elected with a minority of the popular vote. To me that is a constitutional crisis and does not reflect a “democratic system.” There is no mandate, Frankly, for a conservative tide.
“Acreage does not equal votes.”
Except, of course, in the electoral college. Unfortunately.
I think the bigger problem is the winner take all of bounded geography so that a narrow victory in one state (potentially) cancels out a landslide in another. California definitely is disadvantaged in voters per electoral vote compared to Wyoming, but winner takes all is probably a bigger problem. Someone did a model that showed a proportional distribution of electoral votes would have produced a narrow Clinton victory.
Right. We are a democratic republic.
So then do you support a convention of the states to deal with this “constitutional crisis”.
Remember too that lefties tend to do this thing… they are all short-term emotionally reactive and such and so their Senator do things like implement the Nuclear option and then end up suffering the consequences when the guard changes. Say you win somehow and the republic is converted to a more pure democracy where the President is selected with the popular vote (note that the popular vote is already represented in the number of state House reps and the number of electoral college votes.)… and then the tide turns and the Democrat loses the election from the popular vote but might have won via the electoral college.
I have been reading about this generation following the millennial snowflake generation… it is very likely that we will shift back to a majority of more conservative voters as the old messed up baby boomers pass on.
My preference is that the electoral college should more accurately reflect the populations of the states. In point of fact, that would yield more electors for both California and Texas, so the ultimate outcome would not necessarily have been different. The 8 states that have the minimum of 3 electors in spite of low population break down about 5 red to 3 blue.
The alternative is for all states to award electors proportionally, but that would require all states to agree. And clearly, since the electoral college is the only thing keeping Republicans in the presidency even when they lose the popular vote, that won’t happen.
So in the absence of any of these reforms, it’s important to repeat any time conservatives claim some sweeping mandate from the 2016 election: Trump didn’t win the popular vote.
No. I’d prefer a regular constitutional amendment. But I don’t think hell has frozen over. So we’ll just muddle along, and Democrats will have to win substantially more votes than Republicans in order to win the presidency. I guess you’re fine with that so long as the outcome favors your candidate. I prefer the principle of one person/one vote.
@ South of Davis, 10:53 post…
As to the first part quoted… not sure how to parse your words… did you mean conservative/orthodox Jews, and ALL Catholics? Was there a reason why you did not mention conservative/orthodox Protestant, Hindu, Buddhist, Shinto, Moslem folk? [parse that focussing on “conservative/orthodox”, applying to all faith systems]
As a Catholic, I can personally say not all Catholics are “monolithic” on the topics [far from] (and yes, this is a hot button for me)… on abortions, and DEFINITELY on birth control, whether natural or ‘artificial’…
The Catholic Church has not opposed, for a very long time, ‘natural’ contraception, including abstinence, “rhythm”, etc. Would opine that ~ 75% of American Catholics also use artificial contraception… condoms, diaphrams, gels, ‘the pill’, etc.
The basic belief of the Church is to be “open” to conception, in the context of a married state… has been, as articulated by many American priests, for ~ 40 years. Non-married, uncommitted sex is a different matter… irrespective of contraception.
The Catholic Church believes sex is a good thing, but not in a “recreational” way, EXCEPT for married/committed couples… there are nuances there… the Church believes and teaches that sex is good for further bonding the relationship, but also teaches that a couple be open to conception… the Church has no problems with a couple, where the couple are infertile, including after menopause, having sex as often as they wish…
Abortion is a bit different… pro-life is a key tenet… as a Catholic, an abortion in the case of a woman who has had a pregnancy gone horribly wrong, where if it “comes to term”, the mother and/or the child will die, abortion could well be a “pro-life” choice… in my reality, Mom had two abortions… no doctor or other means involved… her body apparently realized something was wrong, and the fetus was aborted [see definition of ‘abortion’]… very early in the pregnancy,,, first weeks… the current Pope has told local priests that they are free to forgive, on behalf of God, and the Church, women who have had an abortion.
I would hope that all folk not consider abortion as a ‘birth control manner of choice’… two lives are involved… or, perhaps one more… rape and incest are two other matters… I accept (and support) prophylactic measures within a few days after such a heinous event…
BP
“Really, you’ve lived in Davis for a long time, did you speak out when Angela Davis spoke on campus?”
Really, I was completely unaware that Angela Davis ever spoke on the UCD campus. My question to you is why would you think that I would speak out against Angela Davis, who had long ago parted company with any violence promoting group, when I am not speaking out, and infact have advocated for allowing MY to speak on campus ? Wasn’t it you who had advocated for demonstrating understanding when people have renounced their previously held objectionable beliefs…..in regard to the Sessions appointment I believe it was ? Would this not equally apply to Angela Davis in your view ?
Tia wrote:
> My question to you is why would you think that I would speak
> out against Angela Davis, who had long ago parted company
> with any violence promoting group
Interesting that Tia believes Angela is no longer part of a the “Black Panthers” a group she was actually in, but does not believe Milo when he says he is not part of “Alt Right” a group that he was never actually in…
Yes SOD, it does boggle the mind.
BP and SOD
I have no difficulty at all admitting when I have made an error. In briefly reading an online bio on Angela Davis, I noted that she had broken with the Communist Party and erroneously confused this with a break from the Black Panthers. However, my question for either of you is, your evidence that she was still a member of that group at the time she spoke here ? But perhaps more importantly, your evidence that she was still espousing violence as a means of social change which I believe that she has disavowed would be what ?
Again, I would ask either of you, if you are willing to accept “change” over time even though there is no evidence for it in the words or actions of Mr. Sessions, why would you choose to apply a different standard to Angela Davis……who, once again, I never knew had spoken at UCD until today.
It’s all on you Tia, you’re willing to accept the change in Angela Davis but still skewer Sessions for something he said decades ago.
“I’m wondering if Tia is aware that millions of people (including most conservative/orthodox Jews and Catholics) like Milo are opposed to birth control?”
And I am sincerely doubting that anyone who follows the Vanguard would have any reason to “wonder” if I am aware of religious objections to birth control since I have commented on it on many, many occasions.
However, I do not mind repeating. Yes, I am aware that across many religions there are varying beliefs about the appropriateness of any form of birth control, some forms of birth control, and or the use of abortion under varying circumstances ( at will, in the case of rape or incest, to save the life or health of the mother). As some are probably tired of hearing, but others seem not to recall, I do not object to anyone determining for themselves what is appropriate for them just as I would maintain with any form of legal medical treatment.
What I object to is anyone believing that they have the right to determine for someone else what treatment they can and cannot have. I believe that MY is as entitled to his beliefs about birth control as anyone else. Where he crosses my line is encouraging his followers to deliberately sabotage the preferred medical treatment of another individual. Using another example, many Jehovah’s Witnesses do not believe in transfusion for religious reasons. This is their right and I would never force a transfusion on a Jehovah’s Witness. However, I would not support their right to prevent anyone else from accepting a transfusion or writing that others should prevent through deception or force, a transfusion of their partner.
Also, I strongly doubt that it is religious belief that causes him to say that men should throw away their partners birth control specifically because it makes women “fat and crazy”……although I confess to not knowing anything about MY’s religious beliefs so, I could be wrong on this point.
BP
“And no one is forced to attend a Yiannopolous event.”
Which is yet another reason that I think he should be allowed to speak. Do you believe that anyone has been making the claim that attendance is mandatory ? If not, what is your point ?
And another point of curiosity for me. I have interpreted your statement that MY has stated that he dos not align with the alt right as acceptance of his claim. And yet I have interpreted your statement that some posters on the Vanguard claim that they support his right to speak but subsequent comments do not support that. I am wondering what makes you so accepting of the veracity of MY who you admit to not even knowing about until the current controversy, but doubtful of the veracity of those who seem to not agree with you.
Because as of so far I’ve neither read or watched anything that comes close to disqualifying him.
@ Tia…
Agree that the bolded part is wrong and abhorrent… yet…
Not convinced he has any “followers” (unlike Jim Jones, who did)… encouraging someone… who should be making their own choices? How is that unlike someone encouraging folk to adopt a UBI program that everyone has to pay for, because they believe in it? Logic check.
The guy is a jerk… no question… but if the topic is free speech…
Do you really think the tide of women pursuing STEM careers will be lessened by ANYTHING the jerk could say? Really? When I graduated from Engineering @ UCD in 1977, 4% of the class were female… today, nearly half of the engineers/engineering professionals I still encounter are female… and this one guy can change that? Really? By his words?
Or do you really abhor any thoughts/beliefs that are contrary to yours? They should be silenced? Or at least have to put their full names out on a blog like this?
My experience has been, when hearing from those who disagree with my world view, about 50% of the time I slightly modify my view, and 50% of the time I am more convinced my world view is superior or equal to theirs…
He had about 300,000 of them on Twitter when he was banned, many of whom were quite willing to send horrifically nasty messages to anyone that he decided to criticize. That’s pretty much the whole issue with him.
Don wrote:
> He had about 300,000 of them on Twitter
I’m wondering if Don thinks that the ~50 MILLION that “follow” Kim Kardasian (or the ~30 MILLION that “follow” Bill Gates) on Twitter are “followers” (an adherent or devotee of a particular person, cause, or activity) or just want to see what they post on Twitter.
No. His followers are different than theirs.
http://www.vox.com/2016/7/20/12226070/milo-yiannopoulus-twitter-ban-explained
hpierce
“How is that unlike someone encouraging folk to adopt a UBI program that everyone has to pay for, because they believe in it? Logic check.
I can easily address why it is different. I do not have anything like the estimated 300,000 followers that he had. I am not invited to speak on college campuses. I do not get invited onto television programs and debates.
I would also note another major difference. A change from our current system to a UBI would involve a major legislative change with the opportunity for input for all in advance of the change. On the other hand, MY is advocating for unilateral and deceptive action on the part of a male to sabotage his partners medical regimen. So in case you cannot perceive a difference in our circumstances and potential for influence, I would encourage you to also engage in a “logic check”.
I would also ask you if you feel that either of our use of the phrase “logic check” added anything other than a note of antagonism to either of our posts ?
Believe or not, Tia, I meant “logic check” as a friendly assessment… it is clear you did not.
hpierce
“this one guy can change that? Really? By his words?”
It is exactly through our words that we influence others. Influence enough people and you can effect change. Yes, really, this is how change occurs. Do I believe that he will be successful in this area. No, but if he can vault himself into a more powerful position than he holds now, who knows what he might accomplish ?
I thought much the same about the gaudy, boorish individual who starred in what I considered to be a stupid reality show called The Apprentice and look where he has ended up.
Frankly
“Yes. FDR and JFK to name a few.”
So the fact that someone acts in this fashion makes it a traditional value as opposed to a poor life choice in your view ? Curious.
“Do you live in a post-modern Victorian prudish sexuality world?”
Nope, but I do live in a world where both men and women should ascertain the preference of others before they make assumptions that everyone will welcome their advances and start grabbing.
“You need to provide cites for this because I have never hear it. “
I have provided links on previous threads. Please just Google Trump and eugenics or Trump and genetic superiority and I am sure you can see it for yourself.
“Do you pay more than you have to Tia? “
Frequently my tax preparer says that I do. I just take her word for it because I do not consider it worth my time and energy to make sure I am taking advantage of every loop hole. As for my charitable contributions, I have never kept track of them, so it is at best an estimate based on those that show up in my checking account since I do not keep track. My preparer routinely reminds my that I should keep track…..and has done so with a patient smile for the past 15 years.
“What is so hard for you to accept here?”
I am glad you have asked. What is so hard for me to accept is the obvious disparity between the words and the actions of our president elect. He claims that he supports the workers of our country and pretends that he objects to “our” jobs having been sent overseas. And yet, he certainly did not object to it when he was benefiting from the sales of products that were manufactured overseas. He claims that he “respects” women…..and yet is on tape ( yes, you can Google Trump on respect for women) when questioned directly if he treats women with respect saying “No, I wouldn’t say that either”. He claims that he is not a racist and yet is on tape during he past year saying that Judge Curiel could not be objective specifically because of his “Mexican heritage”.
These are not things that I am making up, they are all readily available to be seen on tape. Just because you have not seen them does not mean that they do not exist.
“All of these things progressed because those white males do despised by American liberals today put the words in our founding documents of governance.”
I do not consider the respect and desire for equality to be synonymous with “despising” white males. Do you, really ?
Tia wrote:
> Please just Google Trump and eugenics or Trump and genetic
> superiority and I am sure you can see it for yourself.
I could not find anything where Trump mentions “eugenics”, but lots of mentions of “having good genes”.
I’m wondering if Tia will disagree with the doctors at Stanford and Baylor that told us that many of the problems with one of our kids is caused by “bad genes” (specific problems with a couple genes).
I’m also wondering if Tia thinks my friend Harvey who is 5’2″ tall and has short chubby parents could have been in the running for the Heisman along with Christian McCaffrey who’s parents were both genetically gifted college athletes?
I know it is not PC to say this but (as Trump says) some people have better genes that make them better students and better athletes. Nothing is guaranteed and some college professors have smart kids while others have kids who never speak and some athletes have athletic kids and others have kids that never walk.
“Better” genes? What does that mean?
“’Better’ genes? What does that mean?”
Sie mussen wissen! Erbgesundheitslehre. Der ubermensch.
Same balderdash it has always meant.
Better Genes
Darwin mixed with Nitche by Hitler and Rosenberg = Mein Kamp and Better Genes
SOD
“I could not find anything where Trump mentions “eugenics”, but lots of mentions of “having good genes”.
“I’m wondering if Tia will disagree with the doctors at Stanford and Baylor that told us that many of the problems with one of our kids is caused by “bad genes” (specific problems with a couple genes).”
Wonder no more. I will be happy to explain my feelings on this issue. I believe that you are confusing individual traits determined by a given persons genetic make up with the pool of genes found within a population.
Every individual has “different” genes. Whether those are “good” or “bad” genes is largely a matter of perspective. There are some things that virtually all humans would agree to. If a baby is born with a severe genetic defect, almost everyone would agree that these are “bad” genes.
However, what the president elect implied is that there are groups of genes ( such as those of Germans) that are superior to those of other racial/ genetic groups. It was not necessary for him to use the word “eugenics”. This comment is the basis of eugenics which I find both odious and false. It is equally true that he does not have to say “I am a racist” when he has just proven himself to be one by saying that Judge Curiel could not be objective because of his Mexican heritage.
To demonstrate the subjectivity of “good” and “bad” genes, let’s say that you live in a society that values above all else in its males, physical strength or the ability to run fast. The male whose genetic composition does not provide him with these abilities will not be as prized as the individual who is gifted in these ways regardless of how intelligent, or kind, or wise he may be based on his particular genetic mix.
Now let’s consider a society in which mental and social abilities are valued most highly and strength and speed are relatively devalued, the opposite will pertain to individuals within those societies.
So who in these examples has the “good genes” ?
Tia wrote:
> I believe that you are confusing individual traits determined
> by a given persons genetic make up with the pool of genes
> found within a population.
I found plenty of places where Trump says he has good genes but none where he says “the pool of genes found within a population” are superior.
Please point me to a video where Trump talks about how a “population” is superior (or a “master race”) not just himself who happens to be of German decent.
They call it “assortative marriage” now.
Liberals like to call out people that use the term “eugenics”… or that talk of heredity advantages… as being Nazis because they, liberals, like their current resource looting advantages from their highly educated gene pool and the changes to the system that rewards GPA rather than actually rewarding the production of things of value in the economy.
BP
“All of Tia’s facts(?) sounds like it comes straight from the DailyKos”
I have not claimed any “facts” that are not verifiable by viewing MY’s own writings and/or taped interviews or presentations on U tube or other on line venues. Same for the president elect and Mr. Sessions. So I fail to see, since we are talking about them representing themselves in their own words, how the source of these clips would make any difference at all ? Please do clarify how a taped conversation on DailyKos would differ from the same clip on Breibart, would differ from the same clip on the NYT or the Washington Post or the Wall St. Journal were it to appear there.
This is the same principle used by a surgeon when they tape a surgery for an accurate record if they are accused of malpractice, and the same as a police officer when their video cam is turned on, and the same as a filmed candidate debate. Once the words and/or actions are on tape, they can be spun or justified, or corrected, but it is not possible short of destruction to pretend that they did not occur.
And that is the only factual assertion that I have made. The rest is, of course, my opinion.
Tia wrote:
> Please do clarify how a taped conversation on DailyKos
> would differ from the same clip on Breibart,
The editing since Fox and Brietbart edit to make the GOP point while MSNBC and Kos edit to make the Dem. point.
So funny how the other day I was admonished for using a far right wing website but here you cite a far left wing website and all’s quiet on the western front.
I think they start at the Huffington Post as their factual new source.
You might be a liberal if you see the Huff Post and DailyKos as real news.
Just gonna throw it out there- David, perhaps there is something about your positionality as a white man unaffiliated with the campus that leads you to feel more comfortable with Milo’s presence than others…
For some of us his hate speech has real impacts. it isn’t just words.
This is my family
I’d also point out that I lost half my family in the holocaust. With all due respect, I don’t think you’ve made a fair comment. I simply don’t believe that shutting down his speech, makes his ideas go away. And I’d rather have the hateful comments in the open where they can be confronted.
Great picture of a good-looking family. How did you get all those kids to sit still and stop wiggling!?
“And I’d rather have the hateful comments in the open where they can be confronted.”
Yes, and when one side goes silent is when you ought to worry.
It’s also worth noting that you control content here on the Vanguard and the right wing is not who gets quashed.
[moderator] You have no idea whose posts get pulled or edited, nor how that breaks down with respect to ideology. I can tell you that your analysis is not accurate.
Really don’t control content other than my own posts
Right. You seem to have implicit bias over moderator actions.
Biddlin
Have you gone silent Biddlin? I haven’t seen you post much recently. Could that be why the discourse has been much more cordial on here lately?
You have a beautiful family David. Great pic.
David, your mixed race family doesn’t shield you from criticism related to your identity as a white male. It’s pretty offensive for you to use them for that purpose and to imply that you speak for and to all of their experiences. I guess it’s pretty indicative, once again, of your lack of awareness of your privilege, for the white male head of a mixed race family to think that his opinions speak for all of them. If your children are harmed by Milo’s and other hate speech, it’s not your place to say that they should be subject to that harm for the sake of protecting speech that doesn’t harm you as a white man. You’re still white, even if your family isn’t. Duh.
So it’s bad if a white man advocates for free speech for all?
Who knew?
nomekopz:
> For some of us his hate speech has real impacts. it isn’t just words.
Can you post a link that has an actual quote from Milo that you would call “hate speech”?
I’ve been noticing that the left wing media can turn a quote like “unlike my brother with a genetic disorder I’ve been pretty healthy” from someone they don’t like in to “Racist Republican plans genocide to remove people he doesn’t like from the gene pool”…
I haven’t seen anything from Yiannopolous that rises to the level of hate speech. What we’re seeing is the typical left not liking any speech that they disagree with therefor they must shut it down. They really don’t look good doing this.
Of course you haven’t seen anything racist, look at your inherently racist avatar.
I found his comparison of Leslie Jones to a gorilla pretty racist.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2016/07/21/what-it-takes-to-get-banned-from-twitter/?utm_term=.9d157d45690d
Yiannopolous didn’t tweet that. Is Yiannoplpolous resoponsible for what others post?
I don’t think so.
My avatar isn’t racist, it was meant to be a mix of a conservative and a liberal politician.
Now go to your safe space so you don’t have to worry about feeling offended.
Speaking of unaffiliated, many of the people on the petition have no apparent connection to UCD
Frankly
“I was responding to Tia’s challenge. It was met and she is silent about it.”
Oh for Heaven’s sake ! I was at a concert. Now what is this challenge met of which you speak that I supposedly was silent about ?
A good article showing leftists shutting down free speech on campuses:
http://blog.equalrightsinstitute.com/conservatives-respond-disturbing-trend-campus-censorship/
“a sea of red”
A apt description of the coming days, I fear.
Biddlin, you have nothing to fear but fear itself.
Remember too that many of those people in red states that voted for Trump previously voted for Obama. Mistake made, correction done. If these voters decide that another mistake was made, they will seek another correction.
My hope is Democrats get their counseling and therapy over this election, and get to work reforming their Party platform to one that can appeal to more than the 10% of the coastal liberal territory. Then if these voters decide Trump was a mistake we will have a viable choice with the Democrat candidate.
My guess though is that the Democrats will present Joe Biden or Bernie Sanders… and fail again.
The country is evenly divided. Your math is ridiculous.
You are right. It isn’t 90%, only 84%.
Acreage does not equal votes. This is a pointless exercise. Texas has 254 counties. Delaware has three. Counties are a totally useless, meaningless, ridiculous measure of literally anything meaningful.
Clinton won the popular vote. Does that simple fact really give you so much trouble?
America is evenly divided.
Your analysis is on the left. A more detailed view is on the right.
Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2013/11/12/most-americans-live-in-purple-america-not-red-or-blue-america/
Actually, not so sure “evenly divided” if you mean “right” or “left”, or Republican or Democrat… in the election, folk generally had to choose between two candidates… neither of which they felt comfortable with… the growing number of voters/citizens who choose to be NPP is a sign… it would accelerate if both major parties had to, by law, allow the NPP’s to vote in their primaries, nation wide… Republicans appear to be loathe to do that, and Democrats in CA, figure “what the heck” [they understand that if the NPP’s vote 50/50, in a two person race, they’ll still ‘whup’ the Republicans]…
There are many, many of us who risk being disenfranchised in primaries, who still choose to register as NPP. Look at the CA #’s as to registration… the NPP’s are the fastest growing ‘party’… both ‘major parties’ are losing registration (%-age) in CA… yet neither party is ‘taking a clue’.
I am more concerned about the way “elections are rigged” by the ‘two-party system’, where you have to identify as “right or left”, Democrat/Republican… two “monopolies” fighting for dominance… than I am about the electoral college thing… Don is right on at least one point, as to “area” thing, where small states have disproportional influence… but the “framers” besides compromising to form the country, were legitimately concerned about tyranny by the majority…
The president elect ‘won fair and square’ [although he repeatedly said the election was rigged, and emerging evidence that there were outside influences, which may or may not have been in his favor]… the Congressional seats (both Houses) seem to confirm folk wanted a change… ANY change… perhaps without thinking thru the possible consequences… but it also clear that those who pose as Republicans and/or the “right” have at most two years to put up or shut up… the Democrats/”lefties”, to a lesser extent have to do the same.
Those of us who identify with none of those affiliations, and are knowledgable and actually think, will be watching.
Don… you are a hoot.
You are looking at a map of Donald Trump vs. Hillary Clinton votes. Clinton was the establishment Democrat candidate. Trump was and is the GOP insurgent candidate. The map does not demonstrate that we are equally divided politically nor ideologically. The last six years of elections have proven that the majority of the people reject the direction the country had been going under Obama, Reid, Pelosi.
The better map to see this great imbalance of red vs. blue is the House election map.
http://www.politico.com/2016-election/results/map/house
The House will realign after the next census. Some of those red districts will be distinctly purple unless they’re gerrymandered.
Then why did Obama win re-election four years ago, and Hilary Clinton win the popular vote this year? Democrats have won the presidential election popular vote every year since 1992, except for 2004.
That’s 1992, 1996, 2000, 2008, 2012 and now 2016.
You really seem to have a lot of trouble with that idea.
I have a problem with nothing at this point. Because Hillary Clinton will thankfully not be our President and the country is back in moderate conservative control where it should always be.
I think you have a problem recognizing the political tectonic shift away from where you thought the country was headed being force-fed a coastal liberal agenda. Sounds like you are just satisfied to keep doubling down expecting the same hand to start winning again.
The Democrats only hope is to pull to the center. But then they re-elect Nancy Pelosi as minority leader of Congress.
now TIA has ESP? I thought I was the only one on this board who admitted to seeing the future.. and heck I was wrong – happily- a few times.. ….somehow I forgot that the Electoral College exists for just the reason we experienced….
and my crystal ball says that Milo thought that UCD would be welcoming of oddballs and diverse viewpoints…in fact would welcome it….. back in the 60s UCD was well know in CA, the USA and the planet as a safe haven for the LGBQT crowd. it STILL is
In the 60s/70s….it was a safe place for those fleeing Persia..some Christians some Muslims
in the 60s/70s my many jewish friends from Lowell in SF sought out Davis as welcoming to jewish students and families. ….many did not get in… one of the ones who did was my roomie in the second year..
UCD welcomes the Latina/o/chicana/o and gave many a hands up. THAT was the Chancellor Emeri ta doing
The tide is shifting fast as she was getting blamed for things she didn’t do wrong and at the same time not getting credit for her many accomplishments…
Then after the election we get such nonsense from the interim Chancellor and the Napo.. creating fear where there should not be any .. offering counseling to those upset with the election? gimme a break..
BO silently evicted many millions out of the USA….many were not even criminals….
And now some are protesting that some weirdo wants to come and speak?
Well the reason he CHOSE Davis …is now ancient history.. Davis was known for acceptance and forward thinking.
These protests are only proving that the far sides of who knows what are now only suppressing free speech and the constitution.
Of course many many at UCD are english learners..they may not have studied the US constitution..
Thank you for this article David … lotsa food for thought..
PS> I started a response early today and decided not to get sucked in.
But I know many women of my age, older and younger who agree with him that Feminism didn’t do much for the female experience.
Now the women are doing it all… the men are even more entitled to do nada…. many 30 something males are not gainfully employed and live with mommy while daddy is with younger and “better” wives…and the women are now outclassing the men.. For decades, there have been more women than men in the UCs… and particularly in UCD…more women graduate on time or at all….more women have REAl jobs after graduating.. and many young women are the breadwinners in their families.
The boys play video games and hang out…..while the women do most everything.. still as always….in most “families”. Davis has notable exceptions.
But it is still usually the women who bear and raise the children, work full time in and out of the house, etc. While the guys watch or play sports and so on….
The large percentage of women on campus who are covered head to toe, and a few in burkas, and the many of the other stereotypes who arrived here due to the kindness of the USA and the kindness of the UC system, are now more often the ones protesting who knows what.
I would encourage people to go listen, ask questions and be respectful..
I used to go listen to Angela Davis and others…why not?
ya might learn something who knows?
“The large percentage of women on campus who are covered head to toe, and a few in burkas, and the many of the other stereotypes who arrived here due to the kindness of the USA and the kindness of the UC system, are now more often the ones protesting who knows what.”
wtf does that even mean
have you been on campus? have you taken any science classes? have you seen the protests on the news
wtf are ya asking for?
Marina makes some good points.
It is interesting that 39 percent of women aged 25 to 29 have a bachelor’s degree, vs only 32 percent of men the same age (today more guys in their 20’s live with their parents than have a bachelor’s degree)…
http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/completed-wisconsin-recount-widens-donald-trump-s-lead-by-votes/article_3f61c6ac-5b18-5c27-bf38-e537146bbcdd.html
Well, it looks like the vote count thing isn’t going to work.
Next to getting electors to change their votes. Good luck with that.
Then on to Obama claiming the Russians hacked the elections.
What will be next?
The deperation is so pathetic.
Looks like the US is a subsidiary of Russia.
Uh, no… Obama didn’t say that… more faux (or Fox) news? [guess that might be OK if you are a Trump-ette]. But we got a clue when Trump repeatedly said the election would be “rigged”… inside knowledge? His buddy Vladimir?
I just hope the president elect doesn’t try to ‘trump’ Putin by putting his bare chest/torso on line… vomiting/lack of appetite is not good for one’s health… [wouldn’t like if his presidential opponent did so either!]
I am not desperate… [I also try to make sure my spelling/grammar is correct when I post]… I accept the results as a fait accompli… and if things go sideways, will expect you and others to take full responsibility…
What don’t you understand about “Then on to”? It’s my prediction of what might come. The way things are shaping up I’ll bet I’m not too far off base either. His administration is already saying just that.
I know how to spell desperate, just don’t double and triple check everything before I hit ‘enter’. But why should I? I know I always have you to check over my posts with your magnifying glass and correct me. Get a life!
Toi, aussi… that said, truly, best to you and yours…
It seems Donald Trump is the only person who doesn’t acknowledge this at this point.
— Sen. Jack Reed.
We need more of this… https://www.thefire.org/
Nice… a website with at least two solicitation pop-ups looking for donations… very free enterprise (conservative? Republican?) of you… appreciated… NOT!
Saw your post just after getting a call, which I checked out on-line, that either came from Banning, CA or India… probably a “spoofed” number … you into “spoofing”?
No. I watched a John Stossel interview of the founder of FIRE and two college students that had been basically kicked out of their college because they attempted to use their free speech rights on campus.
OK… but had two pop-ups in a row, so decided to not “drill down” for concerns (warranted or not) re: malware…
I know I dropped a class in college after two sessions, when the lecturer said uber-liberal things… actually corrected her [she really didn’t like that], picked up my stuff, and noticeably walked out… first and only time I took a ‘sociology’ class… I needed some Lib Arts classes, but figured that PolySci, Medieval Studies, French, and CompLit would be better… aced all of the latter… as an engineering major…
So that trait started much earlier in your life.
Yeah, BP, I learned to judge uber-anyone/anything early… had good parents…
BP …
She was ‘teaching’ that emergency medical staff treated her ‘poorly’ when she had a possible sprained ankle, and referred to her as a foot patient, then when the ER nurse corrected, and said “the woman with the ankle injury”, she again (her own words, in class), said she corrected the nurse again to say “the person with the ankle injury”… she used the narrative to say that the entire medical system was deeply flawed…
Guess you’d think she was right… I didn’t… a few months before, I suffered a broken ankle, was in the ER… took 2 hours to get ‘observed/treated’… while I was waiting, a couple of “red-blanket” cases [one a heart attack, the other a car crash] came in, and I sat next to parents who were told that due to their child’s injuries, he was not expected to live more than an hour or two… all of a sudden, my ankle seemed like a triviality… guess you think that makes me a “bleeding heart liberal”… no… or a reactionary… no…
That, IMHO, made me more human, and form my opinions about priorities…
Get a freaking clue…
Great story.
Next time tell it to someone who cares.