Serious question, how familiar are you with him?

There are seemingly endless youtube videos of him speaking at liberal colleges and every other possible venue in the past and having long open discussions without incident

I fully understand if you don't agree with him, but if there can't be a free exchange of conflicting ideas at colleges then society is doomed

What about the protesters? Some people don't agree with them, should they be silenced? Of course not, that would defy our basic rights, but that's what you're saying about Milo, he shouldn't speak because some won't agree

He's going to keep looking.

California has strange rules for guest speakers then. My college couldn't ban a guest speaker who were invited by a student group.

Took me a bit to see it. Senator's phone numbers up top, I think.

Yep, they basically just cancelled out a lot of the progress that was made at the women's march and the airport protests combined.

Can you quote the posts which say Milo shouldnt be allowed to speak by law? saying "colleges shouldnt invite (and often pay) him to come and speak" and "he should be forbidden by law from speaking" arent the same.

Lol

The protests aren't really designed to win over your heart. But they in this case are like 30 people, perhaps none of the Berkeley students.

Perhaps someone should suggest that that Trump supporter in Quebec who murdered six people pretty much makes you a contemptible murderous sob?

Paint the town in your senators' phone numbers.

Again, I'm very much on the fence about Antifa's methods, and I think the criticisms have a whole lot of merit. However, all protests (and all politics really) carry the implicit threat of violence. Civilization is fundamentally based on institutions that are supposed to prevent exactly what we saw in Berkeley tonight. Antifa is the reaction. The social failure lies with the institutions.

Let Milo speak. He's repugnant, but we can't stifle free speech. It doesn't mean anything if you don't defend his right to speak.

The post I quoted strongly implied Milo was wrong to agree to appear to speak and offer his opinion, despite civil results in the past. The quote did not say that verbatim but this is not a court of law, you know he implied Milo should have never have agreed to appear because it would conflict with the majority opinion at that venue

We aren't stifling his ability to speak. Antifas are. Besides they're needless destruction of banks and storefronts tonight, I'm not going to oppose them.

I'm not endorsing the violence or even preventing Milo from speaking.

One time at a riot in Berkeley I grabbed a big chunk of concrete out of a guy's hand so he couldn't throw it at the cops.

It's much better for everyone if peaceful protesting and civil disobedience works.

I'm less anti-violence than I used to be though and now I'm kind of ambivalent.

Check your smugness!

Good point and I agree. However, I'm not sure the full meaning of you putting your in italics. I can assure you that pretty much anyone on the fence or whose opinion can be swayed is completely turned off by the vandalism that was on display tonight.

Another good point, most people were peaceful, I completely agree with that. The shots of people smashing windows and burning fires makes the vast majority of people just shake their heads though, and pretty much changes the mind of anyone that could have been swayed to support your cause towards the other side. If we could get some shots of the protestors stopping violence as opposed to standing by and allowing it to happen or root them on, that would go a long way towards helping your cause. Police yourselves or your message will get lost.

I have already seen this happen in Wisconsin with the Scott Walker protests and now the state is pretty much resigned to being red for the foreseeable future. It started with powerful protests that made it seem like democrats would never lose the state again, but by the time the next election came around most people were sick of the protests and voted against the protestors because of all the disruption they caused, and now the state is pretty much a republican powerhouse. Not only did it cost reclaiming the governorship but one of the greatest senators in Russ Feingold lost his position as well. Democrats really need to start thinking more strategically. I don't want to see the nation repeat the same mistake at this much more critical moment. You still need to protest in a smart way and not in a screw the world obstruct everything way.

Just like most protestors are not violent, most Trump supporters are not either. I agree on that but if you are trying to make a different point then please elaborate as I'm not sure I interpreted correctly.

WI turned Red because R's did their best to union bust there even before Walker and won way before any protesters showed up.

Yes, that was the point.

Watching the feed in Berkeley I wouldn't expect other protesters to stop the antifa people. There were like 30 of them and they were ready for violence. It would have taken a major brawl and that would have made things even worse.

I don't really think people "on the fence" are that stupid. What happened is really pretty obvious and people who jump to the conclusion that there were thousands of violent liberal students at crazy UC Berkeley, already thought that. If it were proven that that weren't the case in this one instance, they'd just forget and go back to thinking it 2 minutes later. For the most part anyway.

It would help if the news in general didn't zoom in on the most violent part of any event, but that's what the people want.

Paul,

Feelings on the bottom video here?

Condone such violence as morally right and just gotta crack a few eggs? Just another racist fascist in a MAGA hat getting rightfully peppersprayed at point blank by a moral protester?

Or is that what you consider a criminal act of violence which should be condemned?

Does suckerpunching young women in MAGA hats make you happy because it scares those you have decided to label as fascists? Or does it make you mad because someone just assaulted some girl who happened to have voted and support Trump?

I never said he shouldn't be allowed to speak. I'm all for free speech. If you want to sound like an idiot, go for it. Whats the saying? "It's better to remain silent rather than speak up and remove all doubt." Something like that.

I was replying to microbet who said that he'd no longer speak in blue states. Milo knew exactly what he was doing.

yup, his goal is to get protests and have his event canceled.
Also businessdude, Milo describes himself as a troll. He admits it. Over and over.

Yup, standard bay area anarchist contingent, not students.

I'm putting you on ignore because you have zero good intentions on this forum and have done nothing but concern troll. Don't make it so obvious when you come back with another name.

One thing people need to remember about the Milo's of the world is they make their money off Trump's base, not the Democrats/Liberals. Same thing w/ that Nazi dude that got punched. They NEED the right to be PISSED and FED UP. It's how they put coin in their pockets. So when they do things like speak at liberal colleges or whatever, there is always an ulterior motive. Milo may not have known a protest per se would happen tonight, but he knew sooner or later there would be one. And when it happened, he knew he would capitalize on it. He's playing the game.

For me the best argument for these kinds of protests is that when Universities have speakers come to their campus, it imbues them with an air of respectability ("I've been invited to speak at dozens of universities, including blah blah blah" sounds a lot more respectable than "I've spoken at dozens of alt-right gatherings"). So when Milo or others get invited to Unis to do this, it elevates them as someone more than a troll. The implicit idea is that the speaker has something worth saying. What's more, by making them more "respectable" it mainstreams their ideas. Instead of being a fascist (overused but absolutely applies to the alt_right and milo in particular) something that immediately makes you a social outcast, it becomes just another political category that some people you know fall in. That's worth opposing. Is it worth compromising on an absolutist attitude toward free speech? That's worth discussing, but the reason people are protesting should be borne in mind.

I agree with that point, and I say protest away. Encouraging violent protests? Not so much.