Switch Theme:

US Politics: 2017 Edition  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
  • No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
  • Times and dates in your local timezone.
  • Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
  • Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
  • Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.




Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)




The Great State of Texas

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
 CptJake wrote:
 Witzkatz wrote:
If we lose free speech, we lose a huge part of what makes the USA such a special experiment.


You make it sound like the USA are the only nation that enshrined free speech and a "no" to censorship into their basic laws...


When Germany allows historically correct decals for WW2 German aircraft models, let me know.


Lemme know when it's OK to yell fire in a crowded theatre.


Sure, when there is a fire.

Speaking of freedom of speech in Western Democracies...
Danish man charged with blasphemy.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/718892.page#9217306

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/02/23 19:45:29


-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
 
   
Made in us
Incorporating Wet-Blending





Houston, TX

 d-usa wrote:
Which is stuff they could have done during the past 6 years of course.


Lest we forget, it was the Democrat majority that stubbornly refused to budge and has vowed to make Trump a one term president and that anything he is for, they are against.

Wait....

-James
 
   
Made in se
Longtime Dakkanaut




 jasper76 wrote:
So is it correct to assume that you believe in the principle of freedom of speech, up to the point where you draw a personal line?


Most people do. Freedom of speech in the sense that a government can't easily dictate what people can and can't publish or otherwise express is fine and good. It depends very much on what precisely the "principle of free speech" is.

 jasper76 wrote:
but really the issue isn't Milo so much as the conservative students that invited him to their campus and paid to hear him speak)


They chose poorly. Perhaps they could ask for a refund.
   
Made in us
Thane of Dol Guldur




Rosebuddy wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:
but really the issue isn't Milo so much as the conservative students that invited him to their campus and paid to hear him speak)


They chose poorly. Perhaps they could ask for a refund.


That's their choice and that's their business, as far as I'm concerned. I do hope those students who were prohibited from seeing the show by the violent mob did get a refund.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Leerstetten, Germany

10 seconds on Google shows they were.
   
Made in us
Thane of Dol Guldur




Rosebuddy wrote:
 jasper76 wrote:
So is it correct to assume that you believe in the principle of freedom of speech, up to the point where you draw a personal line?


Most people do. Freedom of speech in the sense that a government can't easily dictate what people can and can't publish or otherwise express is fine and good. It depends very much on what precisely the "principle of free speech" is.


So you think the government generally should not dictate what people can or can't express, but you think an angry mob should be able to? I'm just trying to figure out why you are coming to the defense of the rioters who shut down the Milo show in Berkeley. I'm aware that they perceived him as racist, sexist, homophobic, Islamophobic, that they probably perceived the people going to the show in the same way, but I do not think any of that that justifies the violence and destruction that ensued.

If I'm wrong here, and you don't condone the violence, then we're in general agreement and I'm happy to end the conversation.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/02/23 20:55:26


 
   
Made in fr
Hallowed Canoness





 jasper76 wrote:
For as far as I can remember living in the United States. It at least used to be an axiom people would express regardless of their politics.

Really? I guess they had not yet been subjected to the kind of speech they really, really don't want to see expressed.
It's all nice and fancy to say “I'll die for your right to mildly disagree with me (as long as I'm in no real danger to actually die)”. It's another to say “I'll die for your right to say this thing I find incredibly abhorrent”.

 jasper76 wrote:
The line in the US is direct incitement to violence, and things like yelling "fire" on a crowded place.

So you don't have privacy laws and defamation laws?

"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1 
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)





Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:
The line in the US is direct incitement to violence, and things like yelling "fire" on a crowded place.

So you don't have privacy laws and defamation laws?

O.o

We do... so I'm not sure where you're going with this...

Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!


 
   
Made in us
Thane of Dol Guldur




 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
 jasper76 wrote:
For as far as I can remember living in the United States. It at least used to be an axiom people would express regardless of their politics.

Really? I guess they had not yet been subjected to the kind of speech they really, really don't want to see expressed.
It's all nice and fancy to say “I'll die for your right to mildly disagree with me (as long as I'm in no real danger to actually die)”. It's another to say “I'll die for your right to say this thing I find incredibly abhorrent”.

 jasper76 wrote:
The line in the US is direct incitement to violence, and things like yelling "fire" on a crowded place.

So you don't have privacy laws and defamation laws?


It's quite possible that the value we place on free speech as a principle is different in the US than it is in France. But it is a euphemistic phrase, I'll grant you that.

We do have privacy and defamation laws, sorry I forgot to include those.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/02/23 21:13:39


 
   
Made in fr
Hallowed Canoness





 jasper76 wrote:
We do have privacy and defamation laws, sorry I forgot to include those.

Though I get your point about vigilante justice, I'd however say that in previous talk Milo did say stuff that should totally be punished by those laws, when he outed and mocked a transgender student.


(That quote you give is famously mis-attributed to a famous Frenchman, Voltaire. It's still a good paraphrase of something he said.)

"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1 
   
Made in se
Longtime Dakkanaut




 jasper76 wrote:

So you think the government generally should not dictate what people can or can't express, but you think an angry mob should be able to? I'm just trying to figure out why you are coming to the defense of the rioters who shut down the Milo show in Berkeley. I'm aware that they perceived him as racist, sexist, homophobic, Islamophobic, that they probably perceived the people going to the show in the same way, but I do not think any of that that justifies the violence and destruction that ensued.


I mean easily. When expression is to be limited it should be shown that not doing so would be harmful. In this case, Yiannopoulos has a track record of harassing people. Allowing his operations would put the targeted minority of the day at risk. Therefore, he should be prevented from speaking. If the state won't do it then it falls on regular citizens to stand up. If things need to be broken to do so then that's just how it goes. If you value broken things more than the people he wants to terrorise then that's on you.
   
Made in us
Thane of Dol Guldur




Rosebuddy wrote:
 jasper76 wrote:

So you think the government generally should not dictate what people can or can't express, but you think an angry mob should be able to? I'm just trying to figure out why you are coming to the defense of the rioters who shut down the Milo show in Berkeley. I'm aware that they perceived him as racist, sexist, homophobic, Islamophobic, that they probably perceived the people going to the show in the same way, but I do not think any of that that justifies the violence and destruction that ensued.


I mean easily. When expression is to be limited it should be shown that not doing so would be harmful. In this case, Yiannopoulos has a track record of harassing people. Allowing his operations would put the targeted minority of the day at risk. Therefore, he should be prevented from speaking. If the state won't do it then it falls on regular citizens to stand up. If things need to be broken to do so then that's just how it goes. If you value broken things more than the people he wants to terrorise then that's on you.


Yikes. At least your honest. Not my bag, and I sincerely hope your advocacy for violence as a means to an end does not spread even further into the left. Also, just a piece of unsolicited advice: violence begets violence. But perhaps violent reactions are precisely what you are trying to provoke.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2017/02/23 21:36:18


 
   
Made in ca
Longtime Dakkanaut




Building a blood in water scent

To be clear, the professional troll in question has a history of targeting specific persons for his moronic followers to harass. It's not like he is just saying any old stupid gak.

We were once so close to heaven, St. Peter came out and gave us medals; declaring us "The nicest of the damned".

“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'” 
   
Made in us
Thane of Dol Guldur




 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
 jasper76 wrote:
We do have privacy and defamation laws, sorry I forgot to include those.

Though I get your point about vigilante justice, I'd however say that in previous talk Milo did say stuff that should totally be punished by those laws, when he outed and mocked a transgender student.


(That quote you give is famously mis-attributed to a famous Frenchman, Voltaire. It's still a good paraphrase of something he said.)


Yeah, I actually researched the claim that he "outed" a transgender student. This student was actually a transgender activist who forced themself into a woman's restroom, sued the school, and was giving TV interviews advocating for his position, before theybecame the target of Milo's mockery. He didn't "out" anyone, the individual had made themself a public figure, and Milo mocked them. It's no different than anyone mocking any public figure like Trump or Madonna or Justing Bieber. When you put yourself out there, you open yourself up to criticism and mockery, and its been that way for better or worse since this country was founded.

Milo has plenty of faults to go after, but this one is bogus, unless someone can cite an example of him truly outing a student who was not a public figure, which I'm certainly open to.

Sorry for all the edits, I am trying to be sensitive to pronouns because I know its a big deal to some transgenders...I hope using "they" is acceptable in this case.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
 feeder wrote:
To be clear, the professional troll in question has a history of targeting specific persons for his moronic followers to harass. It's not like he is just saying any old stupid gak.


First, I'd ask for a source, because people have made phony claims surrounding this particular troll before. If you are just speaking generally that he made fun of someone, and his followers took it upon themselves to harrass that person, then are you equally outraged when, lets say, Samantha Bee or Seth Myers make jokes about an individual?

This message was edited 6 times. Last update was at 2017/02/23 21:52:09


 
   
Made in ca
Longtime Dakkanaut




Building a blood in water scent

No, I was referring to the trans person above. I guess I was misinformed.

Regarding Myers/Bee, are you talking about, for example, when they get a clip of a Trump supporter at a rally saying idiotic things then make fun of that? I always thought those people were actors.

We were once so close to heaven, St. Peter came out and gave us medals; declaring us "The nicest of the damned".

“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'” 
   
Made in us
Thane of Dol Guldur




 feeder wrote:
No, I was referring to the trans person above. I guess I was misinformed.

Regarding Myers/Bee, are you talking about, for example, when they get a clip of a Trump supporter at a rally saying idiotic things then make fun of that? I always thought those people were actors.


No, I mean more generally when they target a public figure for ridicule. What I'm getting at is that this outrage seems to be selective. When my team does it, it's OK, but when the other team does it, its a travesty of epic proportions.

Please note that if Milo has indeed outed a private individual and mocked them, I think that's really messed up. I just haven't seen any evidence so far that he's actually done that.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/02/23 22:01:18


 
   
Made in ca
Longtime Dakkanaut




Building a blood in water scent

I haven't seen much outrage over mocking of public figures on either side, except perhaps when people deliberately misgender trans persons like Jenner or call Trump literally Hitler.

We were once so close to heaven, St. Peter came out and gave us medals; declaring us "The nicest of the damned".

“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'” 
   
Made in us
Thane of Dol Guldur




 feeder wrote:
I haven't seen much outrage over mocking of public figures on either side, except perhaps when people deliberately misgender trans persons like Jenner or call Trump literally Hitler.


Yeah, I get a little pissed myself when people equate Trump with Hitler, and conservatives with Nazis. My grandfather fought in WWII, and I find it not only hyperbolic, but also offensive.
   
Made in se
Longtime Dakkanaut




 jasper76 wrote:
Yikes. At least your honest. Not my bag, and I sincerely hope your advocacy for violence as a means to an end does not spread even further into the left.


You mean the famously revolutionary political alignment, that has since its inception fought against violent oppression. You may be too late on that.

 jasper76 wrote:
Also, just a piece of unsolicited advice: violence begets violence. But perhaps violent reactions are precisely what you are trying to provoke.


You are blind to the violence that is already present, that the left came into existence to fight. Your entire world view was brought into existence through violence and requires violence to be upheld.


 jasper76 wrote:

Yeah, I actually researched the claim that he "outed" a transgender student. This student was actually a transgender activist who forced themself into a woman's restroom, sued the school, and was giving TV interviews advocating for his position, before theybecame the target of Milo's mockery.


You're referring to a woman wanting to use the women's bathroom. When you can't even properly refer to a woman as a woman and instead go on about how difficult it is to use the right pronoun and go in for a mishmash of gender-neutral and male you really aren't giving much reason for your concerns to be respected.
   
Made in us
Thane of Dol Guldur




Rosebuddy wrote:
 jasper76 wrote:
Yikes. At least your honest. Not my bag, and I sincerely hope your advocacy for violence as a means to an end does not spread even further into the left.


You mean the famously revolutionary political alignment, that has since its inception fought against violent oppression. You may be too late on that.

 jasper76 wrote:
Also, just a piece of unsolicited advice: violence begets violence. But perhaps violent reactions are precisely what you are trying to provoke.


You are blind to the violence that is already present, that the left came into existence to fight. Your entire world view was brought into existence through violence and requires violence to be upheld.


 jasper76 wrote:

Yeah, I actually researched the claim that he "outed" a transgender student. This student was actually a transgender activist who forced themself into a woman's restroom, sued the school, and was giving TV interviews advocating for his position, before theybecame the target of Milo's mockery.


You're referring to a woman wanting to use the women's bathroom. When you can't even properly refer to a woman as a woman and instead go on about how difficult it is to use the right pronoun and go in for a mishmash of gender-neutral and male you really aren't giving much reason for your concerns to be respected.


Sorry dude, I'm not buying what you're selling.
   
Made in jp
[MOD]
Anti-piracy Officer






Somewhere in south-central England.

Prestor Jon wrote:
 jasper76 wrote:
 Kilkrazy wrote:
 jasper76 wrote:
 d-usa wrote:
We've had Flag Protection laws and bills for a long time now, and they are a good sign that the 1st has always been under legislative attack.


I honestly never even understood the level of animus people have expressed over flag burning. It's an inanimate object, FFS. Do people really think it has magical powers or something? ... ...



Well, people do, and they are very often right-wing "Little Americans" who while demonstrating their deep love for the flag and patriotism by opposing flag burners, simultaneously ignore the rule that prevents its use as clothing, etc.


You know I have a neighbor, a very nice guy, who told me about the proper way to fold a flag, raise a flag, present a flag etc, and all I could think is that he's worshipping an inanimate object like a god. Strange too, because the guy's a devout Christian, which IIRC means he's not supposed to worship idols...anyways, no skin off my back, but it's a material fetish I never identified with, even thouvg I love the USA and am glad I'm lucky enough to have been born a US citizen.



It's not worship it's just respect. The flag is a symbol of the country and what it stands for so the flag should be treated with due respect. Folding the flag properly, taking it down at night or illuminating it, etc is just being respectful not turning an inanimate object into a God. You don't have to buy a flag or own a flag or fly the flag but if you do then you should do it right.


Americans do tend to fetishise their flag a lot more than say the British. You see this in the elaborate set of rules for treating the flag, copies of the flag and flag symbols used in other contexts (clothing, etc.) The UK doesn't have such an elaborate set of rules. In fact the 2012 Olympics showed the British are fully capable of deconstructing and reconstructing their flag into a completely new form as an expression of national identity and pride.



I don't know what this means. If anything, I think it's just the British being British and not being earnest about anything.

I'm writing a load of fiction. My latest story starts here... This is the index of all the stories...

We're not very big on official rules. Rules lead to people looking for loopholes. What's here is about it. 
   
Made in us
Thane of Dol Guldur




Where would rock-n-roll fashion be without the Union Jack?
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





CL VI Store in at the Cyber Center of Excellence

 d-usa wrote:
 CptJake wrote:
For what it is worth, there is a difference between using a flag as a beach towel, cutting one up to make a shirt, wiping your face with one, or using one as a door mat and having items with flag type print/colors/patterns on them.



Not according to the Flag Code.


Really?

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2011-title4/html/USCODE-2011-title4-chap1.htm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Flag_Code


I'm having trouble finding the part making it wrong to have flag type print/colors/patterns on stuff.

I can see where you're not supposed to use it for advertising. I can see where you should not print a flag onto temporary use things like napkins though that would not preclude the use of red white and blue stars and stripes (or flag type patterns) on them. Same for clothing. Says you cannot use a flag as clothing, but I'm having trouble finding the part saying flag type patterns and prints on clothing is wrong.


Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings. 
   
Made in ca
Discriminating Deathmark Assassin




Roswell, GA

So the AG rescinds memo meant to phase out use of privatized prisons.

   
Made in ca
Longtime Dakkanaut




Building a blood in water scent

Private, for-profit prison sums up the dark side of our western anarcho-capitalist society nicely.

Let's squeeze maximum profits possible from crime and human misery.

We were once so close to heaven, St. Peter came out and gave us medals; declaring us "The nicest of the damned".

“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'” 
   
Made in ca
Discriminating Deathmark Assassin




Roswell, GA

It is pretty much the new slavery
   
Made in us
Douglas Bader






 jasper76 wrote:
Sorry for all the edits, I am trying to be sensitive to pronouns because I know its a big deal to some transgenders...I hope using "they" is acceptable in this case.


It's not that complicated, the person has said they're a woman, so she/her pronouns are correct. You only use "they" if a person identifies as non-binary ("somewhere in the middle", etc) or you don't know the person's gender. And "transgenders" is not correct. The word "transgender" is an adjective, modifying the appropriate noun: person/man/woman/etc. The correct statement would be "a big deal to some transgender/trans people", which would be a rather massive understatement.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 jasper76 wrote:
No, I mean more generally when they target a public figure for ridicule. What I'm getting at is that this outrage seems to be selective. When my team does it, it's OK, but when the other team does it, its a travesty of epic proportions.


There are two significant differences here:

1) When comedians mock major politicians and similar people it's directed at people who are legitimately public figures. The president of the US, for example, is someone that is very well known to a wide audience and who has made being a public figure the center of their life. And their actions have a major effect on everyone in the country. But some random "activist" isn't nearly as much of a public figure, and has a much more reasonable expectation of privacy when they aren't doing activist work. And there's much greater potential to dump a large and unwanted hostile audience on someone who doesn't have any desire to deal with that. It's clearly legal to do so, but it's behavior.

2) People mocking Trump, his awful appointees, etc, generally have good reasons for that ridicule. While it does sometimes cross the line into inappropriate behavior there's a pretty clear difference between criticizing a politician for being corrupt or incompetent and making racist/transphobic/etc jokes about someone. One is a message that most people can agree is at least morally neutral, the other is behavior that says really bad things about the person doing the mocking. And Milo's garbage falls pretty solidly into that second category.

And if you want to see those difference in action look at the response to ridicule of Obama. People objected to the racism directed at him, but nobody that matters expected the comedians to refrain from ridicule entirely. It's just accepted that even though he's on Their Team the president is a legitimate target for ridicule.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/02/24 00:05:38


There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices. 
   
Made in us
Thane of Dol Guldur




 Peregrine wrote:
 jasper76 wrote:
Sorry for all the edits, I am trying to be sensitive to pronouns because I know its a big deal to some transgenders...I hope using "they" is acceptable in this case.


It's not that complicated, the person has said they're a woman, so she/her pronouns are correct. You only use "they" if a person identifies as non-binary ("somewhere in the middle", etc) or you don't know the person's gender. And "transgenders" is not correct. The word "transgender" is an adjective, modifying the appropriate noun: person/man/woman/etc. The correct statement would be "a big deal to some transgender/trans people", which would be a rather massive understatement.


Fine. There are no transgender people in my life, and its not like someone's mailing out the new rulebook. I'm sorry I got the rules wrong


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Peregrine wrote:
 jasper76 wrote:
No, I mean more generally when they target a public figure for ridicule. What I'm getting at is that this outrage seems to be selective. When my team does it, it's OK, but when the other team does it, its a travesty of epic proportions.


There are two significant differences here:

1) When comedians mock major politicians and similar people it's directed at people who are legitimately public figures. The president of the US, for example, is someone that is very well known to a wide audience and who has made being a public figure the center of their life. And their actions have a major effect on everyone in the country. But some random "activist" isn't nearly as much of a public figure, and has a much more reasonable expectation of privacy when they aren't doing activist work. And there's much greater potential to dump a large and unwanted hostile audience on someone who doesn't have any desire to deal with that. It's clearly legal to do so, but it's behavior.

2) People mocking Trump, his awful appointees, etc, generally have good reasons for that ridicule. While it does sometimes cross the line into inappropriate behavior there's a pretty clear difference between criticizing a politician for being corrupt or incompetent and making racist/transphobic/etc jokes about someone. One is a message that most people can agree is at least morally neutral, the other is behavior that says really bad things about the person doing the mocking. And Milo's garbage falls pretty solidly into that second category.

And if you want to see those difference in action look at the response to ridicule of Obama. People objected to the racism directed at him, but nobody that matters expected the comedians to refrain from ridicule entirely. It's just accepted that even though he's on Their Team the president is a legitimate target for ridicule.


Yeah, I'm not suggesting what Milo did wasn't a gak thing to do, I'm just saying that nobody got outed, as I've seen claimed over and over, and accepted without question. This individual had already outed themselves, and was giving TV interviews advocating that transgenders should be able to use the bathroom of their choice, rather than of their biological gender, which is a fairly controversial and unsettled issue.

And its disingenuous to say people on the left don't pull this kind of stuff as well. Forget big names like Trump and Bannon...shows like the Daily Show, Samantha Bee, etc routinely take a minor public figure, or just some random schmoe in a crowd, give them a disingenuous and often humiliating interview, edit the interview for maximum laughs, then throw it on TV so progressives can laugh at the clown of the week. It's almost a genre. If you don't like Milo acting like a gakbird, you should also apply the same standard to the entertainers on the left.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2017/02/24 00:46:51


 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





Yeah, but the ones on the right are actually worth mocking for their horrid ideas and beliefs.
   
Made in us
Thane of Dol Guldur




 skyth wrote:
Yeah, but the ones on the right are actually worth mocking for their horrid ideas and beliefs.


That's the thing...people on the right think that people on the left are worth mocking for their horrid ideas and beliefs.

Huge double-standard going on. It's OK when my team does it, because we're always correct.
   
 
Forum Index » Off-Topic Forum
Go to: