Ben Shapiro

[RandyForRubio]

Kicky, I think the issue is that it's being seen more and more. To write it off feels foolish to me. Of all places, college should be the last place where we attempt to limit free speech. It goes against everything college is about.

 

[Siro]

I think almost all stories like this can be chalked up to "college is a strange place where weird things happen." There's beauty in that and there's some regrettable crap in that.

If I had to rank the top issues on college campuses today I'd say too little representation of conservative speakers wouldn't crack my top 50 and the one-off instances of bad behavior that occur during campus protests for a variety of reasons wouldn't crack the top 10. Every campus has some version of this story and it generally has little lasting impact. It will be handled internally, some people will be disciplined, and that will be that.

Nah, it's not just colleges. Take for example when the revelation that Mozilla's new CEO was not a supporter for same-sex marriage. The outcry was so intense, that he was forced to step down. Or the Chick-fil-a debacle. Many on the left have become extremely intolerant of anyone who holds an opinion that doesn't fit into their current bubble of what is considered "progressive".

And sometimes, it can be taken to truly absurd levels. Following Sam Smith's Oscar win and pro-LGBT speech, some leftist blogs exploded about how he had no right to speak for the LGBT community as a "white cis-male" who is merely gay. Not even transgendered! How dare he!

It would really be comical if it wasn't so troubling.

 

[Stoked]

It's just you. I haven't noticed any real difference than maybe he's had more time to post. Same ol' Dalabro.

I think the cowboy thing hit people around you pretty hard. That's had you pulling further to the right. Dal, being on the left, naturally seems more abrasive.

I'm not so sure. It is Dala specifically and not other left leaning posters. But some bias on my part is certainly possible. But they are not mutually exclusive or inclusive. So we will never truly be sure.

 

[TroutBum]

I'm simplifying the conversation a little bit for clarity. Part of the discussion is the degree to which you can actually be a peer of the other students and participate in their shared experience when you're substantially younger (I went to college at 17 as well) and to what extent confirmation bias about college creeps in.

Going to college a little too young has a warping effect on people because skipping grades comes to define some percentage of them. My wife went to college at 16 and is kind of convinced that everyone that graduates on time is a moron. Does it matter to her that graduating early when you're home-schooled is a little meaningless? Not really. The point is she was 16 and took it so everyone who didn't just wasted a couple years for no reason.

 

[Jamezz]

Nah, it's not just colleges. Take for example when the revelation that Mozilla's new CEO was not a supporter for same-sex marriage. The outcry was so intense, that he was forced to step down. Or the Chick-fil-a debacle. Many on the left have become extremely intolerant of anyone who holds an opinion that doesn't fit into their current bubble of what is considered "progressive".

And sometimes, it can be taken to truly absurd levels. Following Sam Smith's Oscar win and pro-LGBT speech, some leftist blogs exploded about how he had no right to speak for the LGBT community as a "white cis-male" who is merely gay. Not even transgendered! How dare he!

It would really be comical if it wasn't so troubling.

Yep, if he ain't black and wears a dress it doesn't count:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHWPfmkyV74

 

[Siro]

Yep, if he ain't black and doesn't wear a dress it doesn't count:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHWPfmkyV74

Just to be clear, I couldn't care less what people wear and how feminine/masculine they are. I have no problem with men wearing dresses or make up or anything like that. And I find the idea that society has been feminized, as if masculinity is humanity's default state, to be sexist and insulting.

I am simply pointing out the fact that progressiveness has become about fitting a very specific mold of what is correct-thought. Stray too far from the accepted model in any direction, and you're labelled as either a lunatic or a stone age reactionary.

 

[TroutBum]

Yep, if he ain't black and wears a dress it doesn't count:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHWPfmkyV74

I can't believe I watched that whole video. WOW, what a terrible piece of ****.

 

[Jamezz]

Just to be clear, I couldn't care less what people wear and how feminine/masculine they are. I have no problem with men wearing dresses or make up or anything like that. And I find the idea that society has been feminized, as if masculinity is humanity's default state, to be sexist and insulting.

I am simply pointing out the fact that progressiveness has become about fitting a very specific mold of what is correct-thought. Stray too far from the accepted model in any direction, and you're labelled as either a lunatic or a stone age reactionary.

I agree with your second point made, progressiveness often falls into the square-box thinking that they so often accuse others of. The point being made in the video is more about how left-controlled Hollywood targets a certain race than it is about the effeminization of society (effeminization doesn't even appear to be a word), which some argue that it is a thing. But that sets grounds for a whole different kind of debate that could have a thread of it's own.

 

[sirkickyass]

Kicky, I think the issue is that it's being seen more and more. To write it off feels foolish to me. Of all places, college should be the last place where we attempt to limit free speech. It goes against everything college is about.

I don't think that's actually true. I think it's being covered more frequently. We had some pretty absurd protests over Michael Horowitz when I was in college and that was 10+ years ago. I'm pretty sure that wasn't covered at all because the internet wasn't quite what it is now.

The United States has a troubled relationship with the concept of free speech. It's frequently conflated with the right to be a jerk. That's why we've had some problems just excising xenophobia from our culture while that kind of rhetoric is simply out of bounds in other western democracies.

Nah, it's not just colleges. Take for example when the revelation that Mozilla's new CEO was not a supporter for same-sex marriage. The outcry was so intense, that he was forced to step down. Or the Chick-fil-a debacle. Many on the left have become extremely intolerant of anyone who holds an opinion that doesn't fit into their current bubble of what is considered "progressive".

There are some pretty interesting economic arguments that discrimination is a luxury good. I believe those are some of the latest examples proving the point.

You're not really going to get traction with me on the idea that "intolerance of intolerance is itself intolerant." It's just not particularly compelling to anyone who doesn't want validation for why it's ok to be a jerk in the first place.

And sometimes, it can be taken to truly absurd levels. Following Sam Smith's Oscar win and pro-LGBT speech, some leftist blogs exploded about how he had no right to speak for the LGBT community as a "white cis-male" who is merely gay. Not even transgendered! How dare he!

It would really be comical if it wasn't so troubling.

This is not a serious issue, nor are those people being taken seriously.

 

[Siro]

I don't think that's actually true. I think it's being covered more frequently. We had some pretty absurd protests over Michael Horowitz when I was in college and that was 10+ years ago. I'm pretty sure that wasn't covered at all because the internet wasn't quite what it is now.

The United States has a troubled relationship with the concept of free speech. It's frequently conflated with the right to be a jerk. That's why we've had some problems just excising xenophobia from our culture while that kind of rhetoric is simply out of bounds in other western democracies.



There are some pretty interesting economic arguments that discrimination is a luxury good. I believe those are some of the latest examples proving the point.

You're not really going to get traction with me on the idea that "intolerance of intolerance is itself intolerant." It's just not particularly compelling to anyone who doesn't want validation for why it's ok to be a jerk in the first place.

"Intolerance of intolerance" thing is a cliche, and it is not what I'm talking about. Similarly, you'll never hear talk about how I'm not religious, but spiritual. My argument has little to do with pop-cliches. What I'm saying is, the left has set the standard on what is and isn't to be tolerated, and everyone who disagrees will be bullied into silence. This isn't a case of people banding together to drown out the drivel of a fringe element, like a Neo-Nazi. It is the removal of speech as a tool for any person who does not share their values, which they consider a product of pure logic that cannot be disputed. And it has little to do with combating "intolerance". Take protests against Western Civ classes at colleges. This has nothing to do with having an intolerant position. It is about what is acceptable to talk about, and what should be buried. Additionally, the progressive stances that are tolerated are narrowly defined within the momentary zeitgeist. If I take a pro-incest position, I would be torn apart by the progressives, merely because it is not currently one of their issues.

This is not a serious issue, nor are those people being taken seriously.

Says who? They take themselves seriously, and they are not a minor element. You can see such mentality all over mainstream publications with progressive leanings. This is one example:

https://www.theverge.com/2016/2/29/11133080/sam-smith-speech-ian-mckellen-lgbt-academy-awards-2016

 

[sirkickyass]

"Intolerance of intolerance" thing is a cliche, and it is not what I'm talking about. Similarly, you'll never hear talk about how I'm not religious, but spiritual. My argument has little to do with pop-cliches. What I'm saying is, the left has set the standard on what is and isn't to be tolerated, and everyone who disagrees will be bullied into silence. This isn't a case of people banding together to drown out the drivel of a fringe element, like a Neo-Nazi. It is the removal of speech as a tool for any person who does not share their values, which they consider a product of pure logic that cannot be disputed. And it has little to do with combating "intolerance". Take protests against Western Civ classes at colleges. This has nothing to do with having an intolerant position. It is about what is acceptable to talk about, and what should be buried. Additionally, the progressive stances that are tolerated are narrowly defined within the momentary zeitgeist. If I take a pro-incest position, I would be torn apart by the progressives, merely because it is not currently one of their issues.

I'm sorry to discount your opinion but I'm going to discount your opinion. This just reads like talking points to me. I find it neither insightful nor particularly descriptive of our actual reality.

Says who? They take themselves seriously, and they are not a minor element. You can see such mentality all over mainstream publications with progressive leanings. This is one example:

https://www.theverge.com/2016/2/29/11133080/sam-smith-speech-ian-mckellen-lgbt-academy-awards-2016

The argument that Sam Smith was factually incorrect when he wondered if he was the first openly gay man to win an Oscar is many degrees removed from whatever bizarre cis-privilege thing you spouted earlier was.

 

[Siro]

I'm sorry to discount your opinion but I'm going to discount your opinion. This just reads like talking points to me. I find it neither insightful nor particularly descriptive of our actual reality.



The argument that Sam Smith was factually incorrect when he wondered if he was the first openly gay man to win an Oscar is many degrees removed from whatever bizarre cis-privilege thing you spouted earlier was.

First, you did not read the article, and just looked at the headline. Second, I'll agree to the opinion discounting deal as I feel as the same about yours.

 

[GVC]

I don't think that's actually true. I think it's being covered more frequently. We had some pretty absurd protests over Michael Horowitz when I was in college and that was 10+ years ago. I'm pretty sure that wasn't covered at all because the internet wasn't quite what it is now.

More precisely, social media wasn't what it is now. The frequency of these militant authoritarian-Left events is not the only issue, however. With social media, the intensity of these events seems to be growing (at least in some cases), if only because of the sheer number of people who can get involved. Because extreme voices tend to be loud, active, stupid and uncompromising, it's incredibly important to defend liberal values in the age of social media.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

It's just you. I haven't noticed any real difference than maybe he's had more time to post. Same ol' Dalabro.

I think the cowboy thing hit people around you pretty hard. That's had you pulling further to the right. Dal, being on the left, naturally seems more abrasive.

I completely disagree. Dal used to be one of my favorite posters. I was very impressed with his maturity (for his age) and his ability to engage in productive discussion. I was always interested in his opinion even though I often disagreed. Now, more often than not, he comes off as angry and toxic. It's too bad. I hope he is eventually able to re-balance. I believe that he will.

 

[Gameface]

Yeah, I think Dal has become more prone to the "You're dumb and your ideas are hardly even worth mocking" type of response. I hardly ever see him really lay out his argument because it seems he thinks it's all axiomatic and all the smart meaningful people already agree with him and everyone who doesn't is nearly evil in their stupidity.

 

[b_line]

Dal, have you been posting a lot more from a mobile device now that you are not in school as much? I used to envision you posting from a giant macbook pro that you carry around in a stupid hipster satchel, bit now I see you posting from an iPhone 5 that is too small to be thoughtful on.

 

[Miggs]

I completely disagree. Dal used to be one of my favorite posters. I was very impressed with his maturity (for his age) and his ability to engage in productive discussion. I was always interested in his opinion even though I often disagreed. Now, more often than not, he comes off as angry and toxic. It's too bad. I hope he is eventually able to re-balance. I believe that he will.

I love you dala but I also find this to be true. The **** infected you.

 

[Dr. Jones]

I've met Shapiro before as a friend of a friend (someone I went to college with knew him in law school). He's a very specific kind of guy that you collect a handful of when you spend time at elite colleges: very very smart people who take ridiculous positions almost as a challenge to prove how smart they are. These people are not evil per se, but they're inherently kind of narcissistic and they can really lose track of what it is they really believe because one of the ways of proving that you're a genius is to perceive the world in a different way than other people. (Yes, I've been guilty of this behavior before).

The one time I met him I made fun of him (lightly, and this was a party for people who were 20-24 so there was booze involved) for writing a book about how evil and liberal college was when he was 17 and had never been to college. The joke was light but pointed, getting to the "but how did you know?" and he 100% refused to back down on the idea that he didn't have perfect knowledge of both what college was like when he was 17 and what the objectively neutral political view should be on every topic taught in college. Find a 17 year old and tell me that isn't comical.

In sum, Ben Shapiro is the definition of intelligence without wisdom. That's good enough to be successful, but not good enough to be truly valuable.

I loved this.

 

[Deleted member 848]

Dal, have you been posting a lot more from a mobile device now that you are not in school as much? I used to envision you posting from a giant macbook pro that you carry around in a stupid hipster satchel, bit now I see you posting from an iPhone 5 that is too small to be thoughtful on.

I got banned for 6 months after trolling PearlWatson about Obama being reelected back in 2012.

I was always this charged and politically active, and I've always been one to never back down. I don't go around picking fights. It's just becoming more frequent, and I guess I've filled the One Brow vacuum.

The only people who've felt slighted by my confrontations are people who are confrontational themselves.

I don't give two ****s about franklin's complaints. Unlike him, you GF and CL definitely make the board a better place, so I do take your words to heart.

But if you're going to hold me to these high standards, it's only fair you expect the same of others. I can't be mother Theresa over here like RedJazzFan says racist ****, Howard mischaracterizes my arguments (and admits to starting questionable threads just to prompt a response from me), franklin trolls, and Archie calls people my age sensitive and entitled.

Who else is there, that I've 'chased away'?

 

[Deleted member 848]

Yeah, I think Dal has become more prone to the "You're dumb and your ideas are hardly even worth mocking" type of response. I hardly ever see him really lay out his argument because it seems he thinks it's all axiomatic and all the smart meaningful people already agree with him and everyone who doesn't is nearly evil in their stupidity.

Definitely not true. I did that in this thread only because I was trying to prove to Archie that young people aren't the only sensitive people. Can you list examples outside this thread?