Support NeoGAF

[plagiarize]

John Stuart MIll was recently quoted in a book I am reading. I found the quote appropriate to this issue.



I think it poses a fine argument. In order to ingrain a firm belief against an idea, you must engage that idea and their believers directly.

It's a fine argument, absolutely.

What I am not convinced of is that this describes the person in question here:

He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them; who defend them in earnest, and do their very utmost for them.

Bring on an avowed white supremacist and debate them into the goddamn ground. Don't bring on a troll who is just primarily interested in provoking anger and boosting his own visibility, no matter who his words hurt.

This isn't someone who puts the cause first. Everything comes second to his own fame (or infamy).

 

[The Kree]

I wish the mods acted like bad faith police more often.

 

[B-Dubs]

It's a fine argument, absolutely.

What I am not convinced of is that this describes the person in question here:



Bring on an avowed white supremacist and debate them into the goddamn ground. Don't bring on a troll who is just primarily interested in provoking anger and boosting his own visibility, no matter who his words hurt.

This isn't someone who puts the cause first. Everything comes second to his own fame (or infamy).

Oprah tried that a few times. She came out her experiences absolutely convinced it was a mistake to give these people a platform.

You can't debate these people because they aren't looking to debate. They're looking to spew as much hate speech as possible during their allotted time.

I don't know any other way to say it at this point.

 

[JP_]

Ignoring people never works that well yo. Folks need to stop thinking it does.

Ignoring people works all the time. You just never hear about it... because they were ignored.

edit: to be clear, I thought we were talking about "ignore" in the context of not giving him platforms. I'm not suggesting we pretend he or the damage he causes doesn't exist. As far as I know, nobody is suggesting we just pretend he isn't there.

 

[Sianos]

An aside: as I searched for the wonderful video of some truly sensational television, I happened upon Richard Spencer's new Twitter handle - Richard �� Spencer. He says of himself "I'm very tolerant . . . lactose tolerant!"

HM THAT SURE DOES HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THOSE RASCALS WHO ARE "JUST PRETENDING" TO BE WHITE NATIONALISTS YEP NOT AT ALL

"plausible deniability" is not infinite and is contingent on the first word

 

[ant_]

Guys, fascism is a legitimate political ideology. It's just like wanting lower taxes! It's totally on the same level! It's not like allowing fascists a platform to spread their ideas always leads to disastrous results!

First of all, you do realize that a main strategy of fascism is to suppress the freedom of speech, correct?

Second of all, do you really have such little faith in humanity? You believe that you are the only one smart enough to realize that Milo is a piece of shit? You think Milo's words are so powerful that he will enchant millions? Get out of here.

If anything, the only thing that leads to disastrous results and the persuasion of people is the attempt to suppress the very speech you're trying to ridicule. Suppressing speech gives it even more power - it shows that you fear them and think they may hold some legitimacy to people. To think; Milo's platform would have remained incredibly small if we simply... allowed him to speak in the first place. This outrage gives his ideas credence.

 

[HP_Wuvcraft]

Who the fuck cares if he's an entertainer first?

He's given a fucking stage to a guy that wants to incite violence.

 

[Garmonbozia]

John Stuart MIll was recently quoted in a book I am reading. I found the quote appropriate to this issue.



I think it poses a fine argument. In order to ingrain a firm belief against an idea, you must engage that idea and their believers directly.

He's a transphobic, racist, anti-semitic prick. You don't need a degree in sociology to know that these are all abhorrent ideas and he's a terrible person.

 

[Not]

Killing people without consequences because they don't look like you or agree with you is a VALID political ideology

These people just need to be engaged with on an INTELLECTUAL level for once

Spoiler

Arggggghhhhhhhhhhhhh

 

[ant_]

He's a transphobic, racist, anti-semitic prick, you don't need a degree in sociology to know that these are all abhorrent ideas and he's a terrible person.

I'm glad we agree on that point. So, when he voices his idea in public, it will be easy for the public to see that he's a piece of shit and his ideas aren't worth considering.

 

[A Link to the Past]

First of all, you do realize that a main strategy of fascism is to suppress the freedom of speech, correct?

Second of all, do you really have such little faith in humanity? You believe that you are the only one smart enough to realize that Milo is a piece of shit? You think Milo's words are so powerful that he will enchant millions? Get out of here.

If anything, the only thing that leads to disastrous results and the persuasion of people is the attempt to suppress the very speech you're trying to ridicule. Suppressing speech gives it even more power - it shows that you fear them and think they may hold some legitimacy to people. To think; Milo's platform would have remained incredibly small if we simply... allowed him to speak in the first place. This outrage gives his ideas credence.

Yes, we should have allowed him to out all of the undocumented students on stage

That sounds like a cool idea :v

People opposed his speaking (not his right to free speech, not being allowed a platform is not a violation of your free speech) did so because he is someone whose intent was likely to use that speech to cause direct harm. That is not free speech.

 

[LionPride]

Ignoring people works all the time. You just never hear about it... because they were ignored.

Ignoring hatred does not work. Ignoring a cancer does not work. It keeps spreading and spreading

 

[Oblivion]

Was very disappointed by the segment, but not surprised. I knew from the beginning that Maher was mainly going to put him on to agree with him on the whole "free speech" bullshit. Maher (probably understandably) is still pissed at Berkeley for protesting him, so it was definitely something he was going to spend a lot of time bonding with Milo over.

I have to say though that some of you are wrong saying that Maher lost cause he didn't do his homework. He didn't do his homework cause he didn't want to. When he feels the need, Maher does some of the best take downs in the industry. This unfortunately was an instance where he had very little intention of actually calling him out on his horseshit.

But I think the worst part was when he agreed with Milo that transgender men shouldn't be in women's bathrooms cause of the safety of little girls. Seriously, Bill? Seriously?

 

[plagiarize]

Oprah tried that a few times. She came out her experiences absolutely convinced it was a mistake to give these people a platform.

You can't debate these people because they aren't looking to debate. They're looking to spew as much hate speech as possible during their allotted time.

I don't know any other way to say it at this point.

I think Trevor Noah has been handling interviewing members of the alt right just fine. I still wouldn't want to see this troll on his show though.

 

[B-Dubs]

First of all, you do realize that a main strategy of fascism is to suppress the freedom of speech, correct?

They do that immediately after they use it to take control. How do you think they spread their ideas?

Second of all, do you really have such little faith in humanity? You believe that you are the only one smart enough to realize that Milo is a piece of shit? You think Milo's words are so powerful that he will enchant millions? Get out of here.

Wow dude, I never said that at all. Also, there's people in this very thread who came out of watching Milo on Maher thinking he wasn't so bad and his ideas weren't so insane. Hell, go back a few pages and you'll see them.

If anything, the only thing that leads to disastrous results and the persuasion of people is the attempt to suppress the very speech you're trying to ridicule. Suppressing speech gives it even more power - it shows that you fear them and think they may hold some legitimacy to people. To think; Milo's platform would have remained incredibly small if we simply... allowed him to speak in the first place. This outrage gives his ideas credence.

This is just words, words that make no sense.

Also, Milo uses his platforms to personally attack innocent people. At Berkley he was threatening to out students that were illegal immigrants. Before that he outed a trans student and had them harassed.

I don't think you know anything about this guy, what he stands for, or what he does.

I'm glad we agree on that point. So, when he voices his idea in public, it will be easy for the public to see that he's a piece of shit and his ideas aren't worth considering.

Tell that to the people in this thread who didn't think he was such a bad dude after seeing him speak.

 

[Sianos]

John Stuart MIll was recently quoted in a book I am reading. I found the quote appropriate to this issue.

I think it poses a fine argument. In order to ingrain a firm belief against an idea, you must engage that idea and their believers directly.

Addendum: you need someone competent and well-read to actually engage those ideas, because if the point of this is to demonstrate to people why treating minorities as subhuman is an invalid viewpoint, it would be helpful if that hateful viewpoint loses the debate.

 

[A Link to the Past]

Was very disappointed by the segment, but not surprised. I knew from the beginning that Maher was mainly going to put him on to agree with him on the whole "free speech" bullshit. Maher (probably understandably) is still pissed at Berkeley for protesting him, so it was definitely something he was going to spend a lot of time bonding with Milo over that.

I have to say though that some of you are wrong saying that Maher lost cause he didn't do his homework. He didn't do his homework cause he didn't want to. When he feels the need, Maher does some of the best take downs in the industry. This unfortunately was an instance where he had very little intention of actually calling him out on his horseshit.

But I think the worst part was when he agreed with Milo that transgender men shouldn't be in women's bathrooms cause of the safety of little girls. Seriously, Bill? Seriously?

Oh wow, Maher sided with Milo on that? Christ.

Also, it's trans women, not trans men

 

[rjinaz]

First of all, you do realize that a main strategy of fascism is to suppress the freedom of speech, correct?

Second of all, do you really have such little faith in humanity? You believe that you are the only one smart enough to realize that Milo is a piece of shit? You think Milo's words are so powerful that he will enchant millions? Get out of here.

If anything, the only thing that leads to disastrous results and the persuasion of people is the attempt to suppress the very speech you're trying to ridicule. Suppressing speech gives it even more power - it shows that you fear them and think they may hold some legitimacy to people. To think; Milo's platform would have remained incredibly small if we simply... allowed him to speak in the first place. This outrage gives his ideas credence.

Well. I don't think Trump is much better than Milo honestly. He did it. Millions. He is now president. Yes my faith in humanity is shook at the moment.

 

[MechanicalWall]

Not surprised that the Thought Police at GAF are turning on Maher here. God forbid he invites someone to his show who thinks differently than you!

I guess Howard Stern and Maury Povich are assholes for inviting KKK members to their studio too.

What you fail to realize is that Bill Maher is an entertainer first and a champion for the 'left' second.

While other members of Hollywood use their celebrity to stand up for politics they believe in, Bill makes a career out politics. Friday's episode was probably one of his biggest ever. Don't hate on him for sensational television..

I really think you guys need to get off the Internet sometimes and go outside and face reality. There are other people living on this planet.

Right, I forgot the most important freedom granted in the United States is the ability for white people to engage in a "rational" debate about which minorities should be granted the same rights they have.

 

[KarmaCow]

First of all, you do realize that a main strategy of fascism is to suppress the freedom of speech, correct?

Second of all, do you really have such little faith in humanity? You believe that you are the only one smart enough to realize that Milo is a piece of shit? You think Milo's words are so powerful that he will enchant millions? Get out of here.

If anything, the only thing that leads to disastrous results and the persuasion of people is the attempt to suppress the very speech you're trying to ridicule. Suppressing speech gives it even more power - it shows that you fear them and think they may hold some legitimacy to people. To think; Milo's platform would have remained incredibly small if we simply... allowed him to speak in the first place. This outrage gives his ideas credence.

I don't know how you can start of by saying we need to have more faith in people to reject his hateful shit and right after say that people will flock to people like Milo just because he was shunned.

 

[Hello? This is Hailun!]

I think it poses a fine argument. In order to ingrain a firm belief against an idea, you must engage that idea and their believers directly.

And then what

 

[JP_]

Ignoring hatred does not work. Ignoring a cancer does not work. It keeps spreading and spreading

So are you intentionally being obtuse or what? Nobody is suggesting we pretend there isn't a problem.

 

[Arthr2ShdsJcksn]

I don't know this Milo guy outside of googling some of the things he has said in the past, but it was an entertaining, if awkward segment, and I found myself agreeing with him and Maher on people taking the bait. That is probably the limits of any common ground, as it seems like Milo is a piece of shit.

 

[Hello? This is Hailun!]

So are you intentionally being obtuse or what? Nobody is suggesting we pretend there isn't a problem.

Except for the people on the last page saying we should ignore Milo.

it seems like Milo is a piece of shit.

And you said you agree with him. So that makes the two of you, I guess.

 

[Alucrid]

I'm glad we agree on that point. So, when he voices his idea in public, it will be easy for the public to see that he's a piece of shit and his ideas aren't worth considering.

you mean like when he demonizes transgender individuals under the guise of "protecting women and children" using completely false statements and statistics which ultimately ends in maher agreeing with him?

 

[ant_]

They do that immediately after they use it to take control. How do you think they spread their ideas?

Wow dude, I never said that at all. Also, there's people in this very thread who came out of watching Milo on Maher thinking he wasn't so bad and his ideas weren't so insane. Hell, go back a few pages and you'll see them.

This is just words, words that make no sense.

Also, Milo uses his platforms to personally attack innocent people. At Berkley he was threatening to out students that were illegal immigrants. Before that he outed a trans student and had them harassed.

I don't think you know anything about this guy, what he stands for, or what he does.

Tell that to the people in this thread who didn't think he was such a bad dude after seeing him speak.

I know Milo and know what he stands for. I am an alum of UC Berkeley and have followed the issue closely. I agree with the ACLU & the UC Berkeley administration on the matter. Milo has a right to speech - EVEN if that speech is hate speech.

On the topic of Bill Maher's show, I think he did a poor job of engaging Milo's abhorrent ideas. However, they both came to an agreement on the idea of speech suppression; the issue being discussed. I think they were both correct in their discussion of that issue.

I don't know how you can start of by saying we need to have more faith in people to reject his hateful shit and right after say that people will flock to people like Milo just because he was shunned.

By no means do I think people will flock to Milo. All I said is the attempt at suppression gives his speech more power.

 

[sinkfla87]

I've been mostly neutral on Mahr in my life but there's some strange idiosyncrasies I notice with him that bug me. I'm not religious by any means (consider myself agnostic) but I find it weird that he's gone through the trouble of making a movie dedicated to debunking theism and religions (Religuous) and got in a semi heated debate with Colbert over the same topic, but he gets someone like Milo on his show and doesn't even challenge him. Like... the idea that people may believe in a higher power really triggers him but a guy who believes (or says for attention, your choice) in all the hateful, socially dangerous shit he vomits into the ether is kind of just let free to roam and publicly parade his cancerous ideology with no opposition for ratings. Kind of hard to overlook that and not let it influence my now lowered opinion of Mahr.

Side note: I typically lurk these threads because before I almost post I always notice that occasionally in an initially mature exchange between two people (often mostly in agreeance), things sometimes devolve into personal attacks and insults quickly and that in my opinion may turn people who NEED to have this important discussion away. I'm not talking about alt right assholes spewing hate speech by the way, they deserve to be insulted and sent to the dumpster fire lol.

 

[rjinaz]

I wish the mods acted like bad faith police more often.

Are you talking bans in here? Because reading back the most recent were mostly about personal attacks, particularly those that told another poster "fuck you". People really need to avoid doing that as much as they may want to.

 

[B-Dubs]

I know Milo and know what he stands for. I am an alum of UC Berkeley and have followed the issue closely. I agree with the ACLU & the UC Berkeley administration on the matter. Milo has a right to speech - EVEN if that speech is hate speech.

On the topic of Bill Maher's show, I think he did a poor job of engaging Milo's abhorrent ideas. However, they both came to an agreement on the idea of speech suppression; the issue being discussed. I think they were both correct in their discussion of that issue.

No one's suppressing his right to free speech, but having the right to free speech doesn't give you the right to a platform to spew your shit from.

 

[Nipo]

Except for the people on the last page saying we should ignore Milo.



And you said you agree with him. So that makes the two of you, I guess.

There is a huge difference between ignoring a person and ignoring a problem. You can ignore Milo and be a strong supporter and advocate for LBGT rights by taking proactive positions and donations.

 

[Hello? This is Hailun!]

First of all, you do realize that a main strategy of fascism is to suppress the freedom of speech, correct?

Fascists and their supporters begged for peaceful engagement and freedom of speech all while crafting their plans for the final solution.

Hitler himself said that had the world knew and instead stomped he and his ilk out with force then the world would have been spared tens of millions of bloodshed.

But here we are again where hippie liberals are more interested in making themselves feel good regardless of the cost.

 

[plagiarize]

This is just words, words that make no sense.

Also, Milo uses his platforms to personally attack innocent people. At Berkley he was threatening to out students that were illegal immigrants. Before that he outed a trans student and had them harassed.

I don't think you know anything about this guy, what he stands for, or what he does.

Why is the action we *must* take, also the one that gives him what he wants?

All the attempts to suppress Anita Sarkeesian's speech failed. No? The attempts to suppress this asshole's speech have also failed.

So we need to change tactic. Not ignore him. But not play into his tactics. We cannot let him whip us up into fury, because he knows exactly how to exploit us when we're angry and upset.

Let's imagine Berkeley had stayed peaceful. Lets imagine that this asshole had carried through on his threats. Do you honestly think, things would be worse than they are right now?

Yes, he was going to probably hurt specific people. And I certainly don't begrudge those people for being happy that the violent protests shut down that speech.

But didn't he hurt lots of people last night?

Just because you can't put a name and a face to the victims of his attacks last night, doesn't change the fact that he did more damage last night that he would have done in Berkeley.

Fascists and their supporters begged for peaceful engagement and freedom of speech all while crafting their plans for the final solution.

Hitler himself said that had the world knew and instead stomped he and his ilk out with force then the world would have been spared tens of millions of bloodshed.

But here we are again where hippie liberals are more interested in making themselves feel good regardless of the cost.

Punch Nazis like Richard Spencer. I can't say that enough.

It's the wrong tactic to dealing with someone like this troll though.

The *cost* of the violent protest in Berkeley is plain for anyone to see. It wasn't worth it.

Punching Richard Spencer and filming it and putting it on youtube for everyone to watch? Totally worth it.

 

[Hello? This is Hailun!]

I know Milo and know what he stands for. I am an alum of UC Berkeley and have followed the issue closely. I agree with the ACLU & the UC Berkeley administration on the matter. Milo has a right to speech - EVEN if that speech is hate speech.

Thankfully there were other people at Berkeley and otherwise who disagree with you and did the right thing.

There is a huge difference between ignoring a person and ignoring a problem. You can ignore Milo and be a strong supporter and advocate for LBGT rights by taking proactive positions and donations.

Milo and people like him are the problem.

All the attempts to suppress Anita Sarkeesian's speech failed. No? The attempts to suppress this asshole's speech have also failed.

Liberals have failed in their debate against right wing extremism for 50 years. It's time they're ignored and people who actually want to accomplish something take the lead.

 

[B-Dubs]

Why is the action we *must* take, also the one that gives him what he wants?

All the attempts to suppress Anita Sarkeesian's speech failed. No? The attempts to suppress this asshole's speech have also failed.

So we need to change tactic. Not ignore him. But not play into his tactics. We cannot let him whip us up into fury, because he knows exactly how to exploit us when we're angry and upset.

Let's imagine Berkeley had stayed peaceful. Lets imagine that this asshole had carried through on his threats. Do you honestly think, things would be worse than they are right now?

Yes, he was going to probably hurt specific people. And I certainly don't begrudge those people for being happy that the violent protests shut down that speech.

But didn't he hurt lots of people last night?

Just because you can't put a name and a face to the victims of his attacks last night, doesn't change the fact that he did more damage last night that he would have done in Berkeley.

So you're now blaming the protesters for Maher being fucking stupid and inviting Milo on his show?

Seriously?

 

[ant_]

Thankfully there were other people at Berkeley and otherwise who disagree with you and did the right thing.

Excuse me? I would have been at the protest. I protest and detest what he says. I still believe in his right to speak, though.

 

[A Link to the Past]

Are you talking bans in here? Because reading back the most recent were mostly about personal attacks, particularly those that told another poster "fuck you". People really need to avoid doing that as much as they may want to.

I am going to try and avoid commenting on bans/moderator behavior, but for me, telling certain people to "fuck off" is more justifiable than other times. Like, I'd categorize the comment that I saw being given that response as relatively justifiable, along the same lines as if a user said "I agree with [X], different races shouldn't marry."

Also technically "fuck off" isn't a personal attack, it's just antagonistic

Excuse me? I would have been at the protest. I protest and detest what he says. I still believe in his right to speak, though.

Going back on your comment on Milo having a right to a platform (he doesn't) even if it's hate speech, do you consider Milo to have the right to use speech to cause direct harm to individuals and invite harassment against them? Because that is what he did the last time he was given the platform you say he is entitled to, and that is what he is purported to have been going to do with the platform Berkeley was going to give him.

 

[Hello? This is Hailun!]

I still believe in his right to speak, though.

And thankfully there were decent human beings who don't care about your Nazi enabling POV. They did the right thing.

Punch Nazis like Richard Spencer. I can't say that enough.

It's the wrong tactic to dealing with someone like this troll though.

The *cost* of the violent protest in Berkeley is plain for anyone to see. It wasn't worth it.

Punching Richard Spencer and filming it and putting it on youtube for everyone to watch? Totally worth it.

There is no difference between Richard Spencer and Milo. Shutting down Milo at Berkeley was the right thing and he should be shut down everywhere he goes.

 

[Nipo]

Thankfully there were other people at Berkeley and otherwise who disagree with you and did the right thing.



Milo and people like him are the problem.




Liberals have failed in their debate against right wing extremism for 50 years. It's time they're ignored and people who actually want to accomplish something take the lead.

But how would you deal with them OTHER than ignoring them and not make it worse? Lock them up? Make it illegal to broadcast or disseminate their views? I agree they are a problem but can't think of a good solution.

 

[Oh God Why]

I'm trying to understand what telling people this was an entertainment venue is supposed to for the conversation. What part of this did we not get before? What is supposed to change now that you have graced us with the knowledge that the main goal was to be entertained?

Graced us with the knowledge? What did I do to deserve such a condescending remark? I thought I was rather respectable in my previous posts.

When this thread first began, many posters debated the logistics of having such an inflammatory individual such as Milo on the show. As you know many posters were either for against the decision. My point was that Bill and his producers wanted Milo on the show not so much as to shut his bull shit down (what many posters were justifying as the reason to have him on), but to have an extremely controversial figure on the show which would bring high ratings for the show.

Bill is friends with many people on the right spectrum of politics. From the very second I heard the news Milo would be on, I knew Bill and his guests would engage with him, challenge him, but also find viewpoints that they could have common ground and make some jokes about.

It's the format of almost every show.

People hoped for some level of social justice. They didn't get it. It was just more entertainment (of course, all entertainment is subjective).

You said you and everyone in this thread knew all this already. Maybe you did but some posters here clearly didn't. My post was evidently not meant for you or those posters that knew what I was talking about.

Having Milo on the show obviously just gave the madman a bigger platform, which is where I stand for the record.

 

[D i Z]

Ignoring hatred does not work. Ignoring a cancer does not work. It keeps spreading and spreading

Anyone who thinks that ignoring this doesn't understand that these are not just words or an opposing ideology.
This shit isn't about strong or provocative language. Or jokes. And it's not about waiting to see how far it goes before people react to evil shit manifest. We know how far this shit goes. Waiting for the fence sitters to decide on what side is safest for THEM to fall on is what they are asking here. And when they finally realize that this isn't about words, this shit will have already gone far beyond what can be ignored and that they've always been on the wrong side with the rest of it inactive moderates.

 

[B-Dubs]

But how would you deal with them OTHER than ignoring them and not make it worse? Lock them up? Make it illegal to broadcast or disseminate their views? I agree they are a problem but can't think of a good solution.

Just don't give them a platform to speak from. Don't invite them onto your show and instead use it to tear them and their ideas down.

 

[Beefy]

I still think hate speech isn't free speech.

 

[A Link to the Past]

Anyone who thinks that ignoring this doesn't understand that these are not just words or an opposing ideology.
This shit isn't about strong or provocative language. Or jokes. And it's not about waiting to see how far it goes before people react to evil shit manifest. We know how far this shit goes. Waiting for the fence sitters to decide on what side is safest for THEM to fall on is what they are asking here. And when they finally realize that this isn't about words, this shit will have already gone far beyond what can be ignored and that they've always been on the wrong side with the rest of it inactive moderates.

Yep. We literally elected a President with a non-zero percentage of voters saying "He doesn't mean the things he says."

Ignoring hate is doing quite a bit to hurt a lot of people right now.

 

[plagiarize]

So you're now blaming the protesters for Maher being fucking stupid and inviting Milo on his show?

Seriously?

I'm 100% pissed off at Maher for inviting that troll on his show. It wouldn't have happened without the antifas turning the protest in Berkeley violent though.

When they did, I knew exactly where it would lead. And here we are.

This thing, where I can't criticize violent protest against a troll as being ineffective, while regularly pointing out I don't want this asshole to have a platform and I'm completely content to see Nazis get punched in the face...

It's absolutely absurd, and it undermines the effort of everyone who peacefully protested at the women's march and at airports across the country against the travel ban.

I'd have protested at Berkeley too. but I sure as shit would have done my best to stop the antifas doing what they did.

Because I knew exactly where it would lead us to.

 

[nelsonroyale]

John Stuart MIll was recently quoted in a book I am reading. I found the quote appropriate to this issue.



I think it poses a fine argument. In order to ingrain a firm belief against an idea, you must engage that idea and their believers directly.

I would argue that Milo isn't a true believer, and in fact his skill is to thrive on attention. Giving him more attention, to a far wider audience, isn't a particularly fruitful tactic in his case. Milo doesn't bring up any interesting issues (apart from himself) that hasn't been brought up exhaustively elsewhere. The guy admits that he is literally a troll. His tactic is to get attention, giving him attention isn't really a good idea.

Someone like Bannon, however, who is an oportunistic ideologue, should definitely be engaged. On the Milne quote, I think it depends on the context. Milo is an attention grabber, not a legitimate representative of political discourse. He is a modern phenomena enabled by mass media...a troll desperate for attention. Best thing is to not give him it...Mostly ignore him.

Also social justice is great. It is quite sad and ironically funny that a lot of working and middle class people are using it as an insut...Humans sure are impressionable...

 

[JP_]

Except for the people on the last page saying we should ignore Milo.

A concerted effort not to give Milo platforms is not ignoring Milo's hate. It's responding to it.

If you honestly think people are literally suggesting we pretend Milo or the damage he causes doesn't exist, I think you're failing to understand their position.

 

[A Link to the Past]

I'm 100% pissed off at Maher for inviting that troll on his show. It wouldn't have happened without the antifas turning the protest in Berkeley violent though.

When they did, I knew exactly where it would lead. And here we are.

This thing, where I can't criticize violent protest against a troll as being ineffective, while regularly pointing out I don't want this asshole to have a platform and I'm completely content to see Nazis get punched in the face...

It's absolutely absurd, and it undermines the effort of everyone who peacefully protested at the women's march and at airports across the country against the travel ban.

I'd have protested at Berkeley too. but I sure as shit would have done my best to stop the antifas doing what they did.

Because I knew exactly where it would lead us to.

Stopping violent protesters is not a simple thing. What if those protesters reacted by exerting their violence against you?

 

[StrategyFan]

Ignoring people works all the time. You just never hear about it... because they were ignored.

what if I want people to hear about it so that they'll be opposed to Trump/Bannon/Breitbart/underlings instead of being another didn't-bother-to-vote or voted-for-trump-what-could-go-wrong statistic in the next elections?

ignoring them might work before they are on anyone's radar, but not after they've taken over the executive branch and have more than enough venues to get their messages across. once things get that far, you can't shelter people from their views anymore. you have to start contradicting them.

whether or not to do it live depends on the show & audience, but ignore-them-they'll-go-away stopped being a good strategy on nov 9th.

the point of public debate isn't to convince the people you're debating against - it's to convince the people watching the debate.

not enough people know about bannon's agenda (and therefore the executive branch's partial agenda). one way to address that is by demonstrating how ridiculous and/or unamerican a breitbart editor's viewpoint is

 

[plagiarize]

Stopping violent protesters is not a simple thing. What if those protesters reacted by exerting their violence against you?

I don't think for one second I could have stopped them.

I'm just saying I would have tried, not that it would have made a difference.

 

[Hello? This is Hailun!]

I agree they are a problem but can't think of a good solution.

We came up with a good solution on October 16, 1946.

but I sure as shit would have done my best to stop the antifas doing what they did.

Glad you stayed home then.

I'm just saying I would have tried

So you're saying you would have physically and violently protected a nazi to ensure he is able to spout his nazi propaganda?

Okay.