[RD] Berkeley Riots

[BvBPL]

Duck skin is too thick, tough, and fatty. Also...that's un-American, shame on you ... Obviously Thanksgiving turkey has been conclusively proven by science to be the "Cadillac" of all bird-dishes and its in the bible, somewhere in Leviticus, I think I heard some people saying that, anyway. You enjoy watching people eat a carrion bird?

Duck is super crispy and melt-in-your-mouth delicious if you take the time to properly render the fat from it.

I guess everyone has their little sadistic/masochistic thing they like... I'm kind of partial to stuff involving ladies in kinky leather/latex/lace, but whatever floats your boat...

See that’s the sort of violence between consenting adults that is acceptable. Violence in the interest of political and social goals is not acceptable.

 

[Sommerswerd]

Duck is super crispy and melt-in-your-mouth delicious if you take the time to properly render the fat from it.

I find that alligator is a dead ringer for duck in terms of flavor, and far easier to prepare... capture and kill... not so much

As far as the violence in the name of political goals goes... You're heard the adage about one man's terrorist being another man's freedom fighter... Political protest is arguably impotent without violence, either on the part of the protesters or on the part of the anti-protesters (police etc) provoked by the protesters.

 

[BvBPL]

Hard to make that argument when so many peaceful protests are effective.

 

[Traitorfish]

I'm more focused on what people did do than what they didn't do. And honestly it sounds like they spent way too much time focusing on this event.

When they protest in ways you don't like, you say they are protesting in the wrong way. When they protest in ways you say that you approve of, you say they shouldn't have bothered protesting at all. How can they win?

Hard to make that argument when so many peaceful protests are effective.

The effectiveness of a given tactic is surely decided on a case-by-case basis. To insist that because something often works, it must always work, is unreasonable on the face of it.

 

[Sommerswerd]

Hard to make that argument when so many peaceful protests are effective.

That's a myth... fueled by the (admittedly deserved) iconization of MLK (and Gandhi).

The argument goes... "MLK preached nonviolence and peaceful protest. Look at what he accomplished!"... and the American mythology developed around MLK... basically holding that orderly and peacefully marching and singing negro spirituals with hands clasped will bring social injustice/institutional prejudice to its knees... it doesn't work that way at all, but its a tough nut to crack, because the mythology is so strong, ingrained since childhood... its almost like religion in our country.

 

[BvBPL]

That's a myth... fueled by the (admittedly deserved) iconization of MLK (and Gandhi).

Its a fact affirmed by things like the UC Davis protest.

 

[Farm Boy]

The HIV quilt and Ryan White were highly effective, too.

People will ignore you if they're comfortable, so unless you upset them they're going to tune you out. Upsetting them isn't enough though, or they'll mostly just want the police to quell you already. You need a combination of enough fear to intensify attention without so much fear as to shift to battle footing, combined with... empathy. Now that you have their attention enough that it might sink in. Rioters and revolutionaries share too many of the same traits as marauders, raiders, and rapists to be reliably sympathetic. Martyrs though... find the guys dousing themselves in gasoline or planning to die for their protest and you'll have a more accurate gauge of which "whining" groups have the deepest grievances. Which demographics does the mainstream spend the most time demonizing? Like, for real. Not for fun/interest/play. It's the countermove to try and suppress the empathy. That's what will actually cause the shift. It takes time though.

 

[Bootstoots]

I wonder if Milo's archetype is actually a thing - odd gay guy who seems ambivalent about his sexuality and has inexplicable disdain for progressives and progressive causes. There's him, Peter Thiel and possibly a few others I've seen.

I don't think Milo and Peter Thiel have anything in common except being gay men and supporting Trump.

 

[Ajidica]

I wonder if Milo's archetype is actually a thing - odd gay guy who seems ambivalent about his sexuality and has inexplicable disdain for progressives and progressive causes. There's him, Peter Thiel and possibly a few others I've seen.

I think part of it is that being gay is increasingly seen as "normal" and the GOP, outside of the culture warriors, have largely given up on opposing gay people, instead limiting their opposition to gay marriage and hating on transgender people.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I don't think Milo and Peter Thiel have anything in common except being gay men and supporting Trump.

Question then becomes whether "supporting Trump" is a sufficient commonality to be considered defining. I'm not sure that once "supports Trump" is established any other characteristics, common or not, are really important. Note that I say this based on using "supports Trump" to mean some sort of active stance, not just "oh, hey, well I voted for him in November, I think" type of support.

 

[Bootstoots]

Question then becomes whether "supporting Trump" is a sufficient commonality to be considered defining. I'm not sure that once "supports Trump" is established any other characteristics, common or not, are really important. Note that I say this based on using "supports Trump" to mean some sort of active stance, not just "oh, hey, well I voted for him in November, I think" type of support.

Why? You can ignore differences among Trump supporters if you want, I guess, but there is a lot of variation there. It doesn't change the fact that Milo Yiannopoulos and Peter Thiel have little in common besides being gay Trump supporters.

 

[NovaKart]

When they protest in ways you don't like, you say they are protesting in the wrong way. When they protest in ways you say that you approve of, you say they shouldn't have bothered protesting at all. How can they win?

Actually it's not so much the destruction of property that I object to although I do find it objectionable. I think they're 1. Giving this person way too much attention when he would probably not be nearly as popular were it not for these people going to great lengths to prevent him from speaking, 2. Exaggerating the threat this person really poses.

It doesn't look like they were really protesting so much either, more like finding any way they can to prevent him from speaking and it didn't work out for them.

 

[christos200]

If people wanted to protest Milo, they could do so peacefully. Instead, they chose to riot, destroying property and stopping him from speaking. They behaved like true fascists and showed their disdain for free speech. Good thing is that after this incident, Milo became even more famous, more people like him and the pre-orders of his book increased by a lot. So, the riot not only did not harm Milo, but it helped him. Nice work guys. There is a lesson to be learned from this; every time 'progressives' try to shut down free speech, they empower those who they tried to shut down.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Why? You can ignore differences among Trump supporters if you want, I guess, but there is a lot of variation there. It doesn't change the fact that Milo Yiannopoulos and Peter Thiel have little in common besides being gay Trump supporters.

Does this "lot of variation" actually matter in the long run? If someone actively supports Trump does it really matter if they are a straight white bus driver or a gay white editor for Breitbart? Sure, one has a wider influence, but they are both pulling the same direction and present the same choice to resist them or not.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

If people wanted to protest Milo, they could do so peacefully. Instead, they chose to riot, destroying property and stopping him from speaking. They behaved like true fascists and showed their disdain for free speech. Good thing is that after this incident, Milo became even more famous, more people like him and the pre-orders of his book increased by a lot. So, the riot not only did not harm Milo, but it helped him. Nice work guys. There is a lesson to be learned from this; every time 'progressives' try to shut down free speech, they empower those who they tried to shut down.

Flag on the play.

The pretense that Fascists have some monopoly on violent protest is worn out and tired. Lying down and letting the Fascists win as a means to proving I'm not a Fascist is not going to happen, so you can give that bit of lameness up or take it back to Breitbart.

 

[christos200]

Flag on the play.

The pretense that Fascists have some monopoly on violent protest is worn out and tired. Lying down and letting the Fascists win as a means to proving I'm not a Fascist is not going to happen, so you can give that bit of lameness up or take it back to Breitbart.

Well, if you support use of political violence, then you are legitimately a domestic terrorist and an enemy of democracy and liberty, even more than the alt right in my opinion.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Well, if you support use of political violence, then you are legitimately a domestic terrorist and an enemy of democracy and liberty, even more than the alt right in my opinion.

When tyrants become the authority resistance becomes a responsibility even if it is a crime. What an authoritarian apologist for the alt right thinks about me matters not in the least.

 

[christos200]

When tyrants become the authority resistance becomes a responsibility even if it is a crime. What an authoritarian apologist for the alt right thinks about me matters not in the least.

I fail to see a tyrant in US. If a tyrant has usurped power and instituted a dictatorship, I would agree with violent resistance. But there is no tyrant in the US. If you mean Trump, he was legally elected and so far, despite some controversial acts, has not done anything outside democratic norms. And no, tyranny is not 'what I do not like' and 'anything right of liberalism'.

I fail to see how I am an authoritarian. I am a supporter of limited government. It is you liberals who want more power to be given to the state, so do not grumble about the fact that the state is now used to promote an agenda you do not like. Everyone likes big government as long as their party rules. Now that Trump rules....

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I fail to see a tyrant in US. If a tyrant has usurped power and instituted a dictatorship, I would agree with violent resistance. But there is no tyrant in the US. If you mean Trump, he was legally elected and so far, despite some controversial acts, has not done anything outside democratic norms. And no, tyranny is not 'what I do not like' and 'anything right of liberalism'.

I fail to see how I am an authoritarian. I am a supporter of limited government. It is you liberals who want more power to be given to the state, so do not grumble about the fact that the state is now used to promote an agenda you do not like. Everyone likes big government as long as their party rules. Now that Trump rules....

You are so late to this party that you aren't worth talking to. The whole "but he was elected" argument has already been used up.

 

[Hygro]

Obedience to authority, i.e. authoritarianism, has nothing to do with "limited government."