The attack on free speech you mention is surely coming more from Trump and his merry men than from anybody else at the moment?In so long as he is respectful and puts his thoughts across as civil discourse, he has a right to speak. But he's veered off that path a lot lately and invalidated his opinions as such.
But there's an outright attack on free speech at the moment, and if you don't believe that then ask yourself how Trump got elected when everyone assumed he was a joke...simple answer, his voters bit their lip all through the election for fear of being vilified for their political leanings. See also; Brexit.
The attack on free speech you mention is surely coming more from Trump and his merry men than from anybody else at the moment?
Obviously there are a lot of people around who are xenophobic, homophobic etc. who are happy to be the audience of this multi-phobic Milo character. Nothing to be proud of in my book. But off course free speech for everyone, no doubt about that. Shame he uses it to make cnut of himself.
this was my thinking also.Never heard of him but he looks like a complete ****.
Someone (I can't remember who) said there's no point debating Milo, because I care and he doesn't, so he's already won. It's the same reason that Dawkins used to refuse to debate creationists. If someone is willing to stand there and knowingly lie to win the debate, there's no point in having it. Actually in Dawkins' case it was also because it would be an acknowledgement that there's even a debate to be had.I'll say again, I've watched his speeches and been really convinced by him but a glance at the figures he quotes show's he outright lies or takes them out of context.
Perfectly put. I wish I was able to express myself so well.His whole approach is underpinned by a celebration of ‘free speech’, which the Alt-Right seems to think is carte blanche to say hurtful and damaging things to other people. They forget two key points: firstly, that whilst free speech is an important and wonderful thing, it also comes with responsibilities; and secondly, that there is a golden rule – ad hominem. Play the ball, not the man. Ideas, beliefs, choices, interests – they are all fair game for ridicule and critique. But the things that people can’t help – their ethnicity, their sexuality, how they look – are not.
The irony is that the Alt-Right and people like Milo mock anyone who simply objects to their views or methods for being ‘easily offended’, yet whenever someone criticises them or points out the fallacies in their position then they throw their toys out of the pram ("damn experts", "biased media", etc.). They are the political equivalent of the one armed waiter who dishes it out but cannot take it, and they hide behind a concept that they don't truly believe in.
Debating such people is, to borrow an analogy, like playing chess with a pigeon: you can employ logic, play by the rules and take care with all your moves, but the pigeon will inevitably knock all the pieces over and shit on the board.
Actually, I want to retract 'interests' from my list of things that are fair game - no-one can help what they like or are into! I loathe it when people take the piss out of other people's hobbies and interests (something which Milo has often done in his writing).Perfectly put. I wish I was able to express myself so well.
Perfectly put. I wish I was able to express myself so well.