Progressivist Protests

How should society be organised, if at all?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

uwot
Posts: 6093
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:21 am

Re: Progressivist Protests

Post by uwot »

Immanuel Can wrote:You left out the question I asked: why is what's not okay for authoritarians (i.e. suppressing the right to speech, by force, as at Beserkeley) treated as just fine -- even admirable -- for Leftists?
It isn't. As I said, you simply haven't done the research and just spouted the ill informed bollocks that suits your ideology.
Here it is again:

"UC Berkeley condemns in the strongest possible terms the actions of individuals who invaded the campus, infiltrated a crowd of peaceful students, and used violent tactics to close down the event. We deeply regret that the violence unleashed by this group undermined the First Amendment rights of the speaker as well as those who came to lawfully assemble and protest his presence," university spokesman Dan Mogulof responded."

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/02/02/mi ... -left.html
User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8364
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: Progressivist Protests

Post by Hobbes' Choice »

uwot wrote:
Hobbes' Choice wrote:
uwot wrote: It's wasted on Mr Can. He won't get it.
His response proves you right.
I suppose the fact that he has retreated from proselytising, through preaching to the converted to barely coherent rants about 'leftists' and 'progressivists' is a sign that even he acknowledges his irrelevance.
Nicely put.
User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8364
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: Progressivist Protests

Post by Hobbes' Choice »

Immanuel Can wrote:
Hobbes' Choice wrote:What you are asking is irrelevant. I posed a ridiculous dichotomy to reflect your one..
Deceptive, Hobbes.

You left out the question I asked: why is what's not okay for authoritarians (i.e. suppressing the right to speech, by force, as at Beserkeley) treated as just fine -- even admirable -- for Leftists?

Answer the real question, if you can.
I told you your dichotomy was ridiculous.
The Berkeley students (I presume you are talking about the boycott of Breitbart), have right on their side.
Like truth is always a defence against the accusation of slander; when students do not wish their university to support a fascist lie machine, then it is less likely that the "authorities" will be called to adjust a (university) domestic matter.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22257
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Progressivist Protests

Post by Immanuel Can »

Hobbes' Choice wrote: The Berkeley students (I presume you are talking about the boycott of Breitbart), have right on their side.
Ah.

So if you believe you "have right on your side," as you put it, then the rules don't apply anymore. You can be as violent, criminal, repressive and authoritarian as you want, because...you're right! And "being right" (or thinking your are?) is an excuse for things like burning shops, attacking people and instituting mob rule?

Well, congratulations: you'll no doubt give great comfort to Neo-Nazis and Islamists alike. For they're very fond of the same activities that give such joy to the Leftist mob, and they never lack the belief that "right is on their side." :shock:
User avatar
Gustav Bjornstrand
Posts: 682
Joined: Thu Jul 18, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Progressivist Protests

Post by Gustav Bjornstrand »

I would suggest, uwot, that you are not taking into consideration that the Progressive Left, which in many senses can also be called the Democratic Party and its power-structure associated with the State, supports in many different ways what can be accurately described as anarchy and an anarchic-resistance approach to the presidency of Trump. The declaration offered by the university is one that would necessarily have to be offered and, I suggest, does not mean very much. The established Berkeley power-structure, largely former activists, has very real and profound problems with someone like Milo Yiannopoulos. I doubt that you are paying close attention to what is going on in Amwerican politics right now, and that you read the NY Times with regularity, but it is not hard to see that the Times, and many different journals of opinion, has taken what might only be called an anarchic stand. To speak about what that 'anarchic' stand is and of what it consists is a more involved conversation and, as I am sure you must recognize, an in-depth and up-front conversation on any theme, political, social and philosophical (laughs) simply does not go one here. Bickering and name-calling is what you more often engage in.

All over the country there are manifestations of anarchic resistance. It would be possible to have a conversation about that and even, perhaps, to make judgments and to conclude if it is good or bad, necessary, or destructive. That is another conversation. But one must I think understand that a mood of anarchy, and an activism that tends toward anarchic uprising, is taking form and has been developing for quite some time now.

To understand what is going on --- different from what is mostly *performed* in these pages --- requires seeing and understanding the conflict between very different poles that are entrenched in American society and politics. If you (I assume you do in fact) wanted to reduce it to a stupid polarity, and take your side in a bickering fight, you will destroy the possibility of talking maturely about what is going on. This is what goes on here in this forum as I assume you are aware.

But if you want to speak realistically, and fairly, about what is going on it means taking some steps backwards in order to establish a ground for conversation, and then some basic ground rules.

This (by Hobbes): "The Berkeley students (I presume you are talking about the boycott of Breitbart), have right on their side."

Represents an error in view. This statement cannot, of course, stand on its own merit. It is an ideological declaration and nothing more. To function it needs to be rephrased. One can say that a certain faction of students feels it understands and upholds 'truth' but that, as philosophers, we know that no mere truth-claim can simply assert itself as truth without support and discursive proofs.

Some Berkeley students are not charmed by the Progressive-Left ideological dominance and the claim that they know and defend 'truth' and can simply reveal it to other people. They see and understand that there exists a university mind-set which, though the comparison is extreme, corresponds to Maoist truth-declarations and an intellectual life dominated by the 'politically correct'. I have come to conclude that you, uwot, you yourself are located in this camp and thus I question you intellectual fiber. The assertion is made in good-faith and not because I want to pick a fight with you or start another utterly stooopid and predicable Philosophy Now flame war among the (semi-retarded I sometimes think) mock-philosophers who play silly games, but because I am interested in ideas, have a certain respect for you, and want to better understand on what your understanding of things is based.
uwot
Posts: 6093
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:21 am

Re: Progressivist Protests

Post by uwot »

And again:
"UC Berkeley condemns in the strongest possible terms the actions of individuals who invaded the campus, infiltrated a crowd of peaceful students, and used violent tactics to close down the event. We deeply regret that the violence unleashed by this group undermined the First Amendment rights of the speaker as well as those who came to lawfully assemble and protest his presence," university spokesman Dan Mogulof responded."

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/02/02/mi ... -left.html

You really should learn to do some research, Mr Can.

Gus, take note: there is a profound difference between lawful protest and anarchy.
User avatar
Gustav Bjornstrand
Posts: 682
Joined: Thu Jul 18, 2013 2:25 pm

Re: Progressivist Protests

Post by Gustav Bjornstrand »

There is also a lot of difference between ethical protest and unethical opposition. I suggest that there is a wave of unethical opposition to a duly elected president that is a reflection of a civic rupture. While I can understand the sentiment, to a degree, what I don't think is well understood that this general anarchic opposition, a sort of activist's disposition, is fundamentally undermining to civic processes. I am not that politically involved and I can see this aspect quite clearly. This civic rupture is not occurring among right-leaning people, or social conservatives, but among the Left and especially the left-establishment. I notice it very strongly in nearly every article title in the NY Times. This is not 'protest', and it is not the role of a leading journal to function as a protester's platform, it is a form of anarchic expression.

The activities of this Black Bloc are radical and unlawful expressions, this is true, but it is my impression that these actions are supported, not overtly with statements of support, but through an attitude of acceptance. The militancy to shut down the university, or to block a certain speaker from being able to speak, which occurs when people say things like 'No Free Speech for Fascist!' and then make sure that no one they call a 'fascist' is allowed to speak, is more and more common on the universities.

For this reason my contention stands: I say that we are witnessing activism on the part of the Left-Progressive class which is beginning to border the sort of activity that they condemn. They condemn 'fascists' while they use the precise methods of those they condemn.

It is not a marginalized group that is 'protesting' but rather it is the System itself (systematized policy) that is resisting different strains of idea which it is frightened by or which it hates. I am not referring to these Black Bloc people but to a pole within the political and economic establishment (and certainly the establishment that dominates education).
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22257
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Progressivist Protests

Post by Immanuel Can »

Gustav Bjornstrand wrote:For this reason my contention stands: I say that we are witnessing activism on the part of the Left-Progressive class which is beginning to border the sort of activity that they condemn. They condemn 'fascists' while they use the precise methods of those they condemn.
"Border on"? :shock: Short of burning actual people at the stake, they've done everything they claim to deplore. They've burned books, suppressed dissent, denied the right to free speech, persecuted a homosexual for his political opinions, wrecked and stolen personal property...

This isn't "anarchic" or even sensibly "leftist," as either of those things would suggest some kind of intelligent philosophical awareness: it's the petulant behaviour of spoiled fools. The "Black Bloc" seems to have no other membership requirement or ideological commitments than that a person show up in a black outfit, with face concealed so as to prevent arrest for the crimes they hope to perpetrate. They are then to be allowed to do whatever they wish, without getting hurt or arrested for it.

And the media will cluck and spin the story to, "See what Trump made us do now?" :lol:
It is not a marginalized group that is 'protesting' but rather it is the System itself (systematized policy) that is resisting different strains of idea which it is frightened by or which it hates.
No, you're right: they're far from marginalized. They're disproportionately middle-class white males, apparently. Even the female leftists associated with them are overwhelmingly white, middle-class and privileged. (Think of Ashley Judd rallying "the troops" while wearing a pearl necklace: how funny is that?) And I think you're overcomplicating them a bit; they're hardly representatives of a "system,"...unless maybe we include the mental-health and daycare systems. :lol:

Notice that absolutely NONE of this took place when Obama was elected for two consecutive terms. So say what we will about the American Right, they don't seem to be petulant losers. I don't know why, but for whatever reason, they seemed not to see a need for burning cars and smashing windows, or for ranting about their body-parts in Washington and threatening to blow up the White House.

What is going on now pretty much tells us as much as we need to know about the intellectual, moral and maturity level of the American Left.
User avatar
Harbal
Posts: 9557
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:03 pm
Location: Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: Progressivist Protests

Post by Harbal »

Immanuel Can wrote:Even the female leftists associated with them are overwhelmingly white, middle-class and privileged. (Think of Ashley Judd rallying "the troops" while wearing a pearl necklace: how funny is that?)
How funny is it? My God! My sides are splitting, I'm laughing so much. I suspect that if I knew who Ashley Judd was I'd find it even funnier. Who gave her the pearl necklace, by the way? Probably just an admirer who felt like splashing out on her.
You obviously have a low opinion of leftists, Immanuel, what's your position on ambidexterity?
User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8364
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: Progressivist Protests

Post by Hobbes' Choice »

Immanuel Can wrote:
Hobbes' Choice wrote: The Berkeley students (I presume you are talking about the boycott of Breitbart), have right on their side.
Ah.

So if you believe you "have right on your side," as you put it, then the rules don't apply anymore. You can be as violent, criminal, repressive and authoritarian as you want, because...you're right! And "being right"
No idiot it means that it does not compare the people who are wrong, dolt.
Impenitent
Posts: 4329
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:04 pm

Re: Progressivist Protests

Post by Impenitent »

Harbal wrote:
Immanuel Can wrote:Even the female leftists associated with them are overwhelmingly white, middle-class and privileged. (Think of Ashley Judd rallying "the troops" while wearing a pearl necklace: how funny is that?)
How funny is it? My God! My sides are splitting, I'm laughing so much. I suspect that if I knew who Ashley Judd was I'd find it even funnier. Who gave her the pearl necklace, by the way? Probably just an admirer who felt like splashing out on her.
You obviously have a low opinion of leftists, Immanuel, what's your position on ambidexterity?
must have been ZZ Top

-Imp
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22257
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Progressivist Protests

Post by Immanuel Can »

Hobbes' Choice wrote:No idiot it means that it does not compare the people who are wrong, dolt.
Such a rebuke is so much more stinging when the person who launches it can punctuate.

However, I see your position: those you declare "right" can do anything they want. Those you declare "wrong" cannot. I've got it. It's the classic position of every totalitarian.
Walker
Posts: 14280
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: Progressivist Protests

Post by Walker »

President Trump has threatened to withdraw about $250 million in aid from Berkeley.

He might start cracking heads.

How President Reagan dealt with the Berkeley protesters in 1969
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bpg0UfpuUAs

“All of it began the first time some of you who know better, and are old enough to know better, let young people think that they have the right to choose the laws they would obey as long as they were doing it in the name of social protest.”
- President Reagan, speaking to Berkley officials


Old-timers at Berkeley lived through the sixties. The old glory days.
Pluto
Posts: 1856
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 9:26 pm
Location: Belgium

Re: Progressivist Protests

Post by Pluto »

Arising_uk wrote:
Pluto wrote:...
They knew it was to be the opposite and so
Your conspiracy goggles blinker and blind you.
What a jerk - it is rather good governance or management - to consider ahead of time where you want to be, and then how best in the present (on that course to reach that goal) to set things off. The goggle of the mainstream you wear.
User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 12314
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

Re: Progressivist Protests

Post by Arising_uk »

:lol:
Unless it's missed your attention your world of alternative facts is the mainstream.
Post Reply