First  Prev  1  2  Next  Last
Post Reply What it was like to be at the Boston free speech rally
23044 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
The White House
Offline
Posted 8/26/17
I gotta give props to the police for keeping this from becoming like Charleston, they did a good job. Anyone else find any good video?

Dr Shiva Ayyadurai speech (Free speech demonstrators): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_VpzG5xFThc

Man asks the the protesters of the Free speech demonstration why he should join their cause: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7KiNWJ8FiYg&t

Man with "Fuck NAZI, Fuck Anti-fa, Trump 2020" sign interacting with the protesters of the free speech demonstration: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TiwRnW9l1k8

Troll yelling at Anti-Fa from across the police line: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lplhIxgtVH0
25660 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Imouto Sanctuary
Online
Posted 8/26/17 , edited 8/26/17
Huh, no violence? That is great. Even if I may disagree with the speakers and their issues, I think a loss of limb and life is but tragic over petty politics.
Posted 8/26/17


30397 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
51
Offline
Posted 8/26/17
My biggest issue with the thing is that apparently, the press wasn't allowed to get close enough to hear what the free speech protesters were actually saying.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/08/the-boston-rally-and-the-lefts-intolerance-of-free-speech.html


PeripheralVisionary wrote:

Huh, no violence? That is great. Even if I may disagree with the speakers and their issues, I think a loss of limb and life is but tragic over petty politics.


That's true. Protests should be nonviolent whenever possible. The counter protests seem to go a little crazy, but I don't think they assaulted anyone.
26190 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / F / Various
Offline
Posted 8/26/17
The concept of freedom of speech is... interesting.

The whole idea behind it is that if you give as many people as possible access to as much information as possible, it will result in the best outcomes. Whether you believe that God, or some other force, guides people towards the truth, or that people are naturally balanced enough to smell a lie, that's the theory.

But as we've seen, the internet has just given crazy people a stage equal to that of people who know their facts. No matter what you'd label "facts" vs. "crazy", you must realize they have an equal stage due to the internet. The fact that there's even a debate over what's "fact" and what's "crazy" shows that they have an equal stage. (It's also important to recognize that the recognized "facts" before the internet weren't all accurate, but at least back then, people changed their views eventually when science proved them wrong. Now, if they can find a stranger on the internet who will give them permission to not change, and to actually regress from science, it seems people are eager to take that permission).

Does that mean governments should get involved? No, but for the opposite reason from what most people say. Most people would say that governments shouldn't interfere with free speech because governments are big organizations, and therefore, a threat to individuals. I say that governments shouldn't get involved because governments are mere humans. Politicians, etc., are subject to the same human failings as everyone else. Maybe once every other century, the species is blessed with a Lincoln, or an Elizabeth I, but those are rare, and for every one of those that does get made monarch or president or something, there are probably dozens of that level that don't want to be bothered, and refuse the position.

Until some wiser-than-human being reveals itself and somehow gains the trust of humanity, no system of government is better than any other - with the exception of one that involves violence or force, which is wrong. And since governments are only human, it's important to remember that whatever power the government has to help your side can also be used to help the other side; and whatever protection you have against the government can also be used by an enemy of yours (esp. a thief or murderer) against law enforcement justly coming after them.
23044 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
The White House
Offline
Posted 8/26/17

PeripheralVisionary wrote:

Huh, no violence? That is great. Even if I may disagree with the speakers and their issues, I think a loss of limb and life is but tragic over petty politics.


I wouldn't call it non-violent but there was no major violence there and the police tried to stop fights whenever possible. This is better than it has been. The Boston police did their job and were professional which is a huge improvement over Charleston.
26190 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / F / Various
Offline
Posted 8/26/17

encrypted12345 wrote:


http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/08/the-boston-rally-and-the-lefts-intolerance-of-free-speech.html



Freddie saw this very clearly only a week ago, explaining why he had drastically culled his online content: “I wanted to look past what we once called ideology: I wanted to see the ways in which my internet-mediated intellectual life was dominated by assumptions that did not recognize themselves as assumptions, to understand how the perspective that did not understand itself to be a perspective had distorted my vision of the world. I wanted to better see the water in which my school of fish swims.”

So he tried to find a new perspective, but still failed. He realized what I once saw. You cannot edit this stream. It edits you in the end.


Can we just... this... just this.
23044 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
The White House
Offline
Posted 8/26/17

LavenderMintRose wrote:

The concept of freedom of speech is... interesting.

The whole idea behind it is that if you give as many people as possible access to as much information as possible, it will result in the best outcomes. Whether you believe that God, or some other force, guides people towards the truth, or that people are naturally balanced enough to smell a lie, that's the theory.

But as we've seen, the internet has just given crazy people a stage equal to that of people who know their facts. No matter what you'd label "facts" vs. "crazy", you must realize they have an equal stage due to the internet. The fact that there's even a debate over what's "fact" and what's "crazy" shows that they have an equal stage. (It's also important to recognize that the recognized "facts" before the internet weren't all accurate, but at least back then, people changed their views eventually when science proved them wrong. Now, if they can find a stranger on the internet who will give them permission to not change, and to actually regress from science, it seems people are eager to take that permission).

Does that mean governments should get involved? No, but for the opposite reason from what most people say. Most people would say that governments shouldn't interfere with free speech because governments are big organizations, and therefore, a threat to individuals. I say that governments shouldn't get involved because governments are mere humans. Politicians, etc., are subject to the same human failings as everyone else. Maybe once every other century, the species is blessed with a Lincoln, or an Elizabeth I, but those are rare, and for every one of those that does get made monarch or president or something, there are probably dozens of that level that don't want to be bothered, and refuse the position.

Until some wiser-than-human being reveals itself and somehow gains the trust of humanity, no system of government is better than any other - with the exception of one that involves violence or force, which is wrong. And since governments are only human, it's important to remember that whatever power the government has to help your side can also be used to help the other side; and whatever protection you have against the government can also be used by an enemy of yours (esp. a thief or murderer) against law enforcement justly coming after them.


I'd say the opposite is true. Thanks to the internet more people are becoming educated and are looking at facts instead of blindly being told what to think by the media. I've been seeing tons of former crazies starting to rethink and eventually change into someone who follows facts instead of the latest emotional fad.

I think the biggest thing is that everyone has a camera and is able to record then upload the crazy online. It used to be that stuff was either edited in or out of the video clips showed on the media. So they controlled what you seen. Now we are seeing the world as it is instead of how its portrayed. It's the difference of reading an autobiography and watching video of someone's life.

I have to disagree that certain forms of government are worse than others:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purges_of_the_Communist_Party_of_the_Soviet_Union

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_killings_under_Communist_regimes

In feudalism peasants are brutally oppressed and exploited.

Dictatorships result in Cuban/Iraq like situations

Monarchies can either be good or bad depending on your king and the only way to get rid of them is revolution.
15750 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M
Offline
Posted 8/26/17

Rujikin wrote:
I'd say the opposite is true. Thanks to the internet more people are becoming educated and are looking at facts instead of blindly being told what to think by the media. I've been seeing tons of former crazies starting to rethink and eventually change into someone who follows facts instead of the latest emotional fad.


I've seen just as many people wander into the deep end of Youtube conspiracy videos and come out a different person.

We've reached the point where there is so much information and so much information that is directly contrary to other information, that it is becoming more difficult to discover what is actually true. I think people are becoming more knowledgeable, not more educated (though I may just be using synonyms and pretending they are different for the sake of discussion). People are acquiring more information about the world, some true, some false, however, they are not reaching a point where this information is enabling them to find the truth and make decisions based upon that truth.
3060 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
29 / F / The margins
Offline
Posted 8/26/17

LavenderMintRose wrote:


encrypted12345 wrote:


http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/08/the-boston-rally-and-the-lefts-intolerance-of-free-speech.html



Freddie saw this very clearly only a week ago, explaining why he had drastically culled his online content: “I wanted to look past what we once called ideology: I wanted to see the ways in which my internet-mediated intellectual life was dominated by assumptions that did not recognize themselves as assumptions, to understand how the perspective that did not understand itself to be a perspective had distorted my vision of the world. I wanted to better see the water in which my school of fish swims.”

So he tried to find a new perspective, but still failed. He realized what I once saw. You cannot edit this stream. It edits you in the end.


Can we just... this... just this.


Thanks - I thought I was the only one saying that kind of stuff around here.
23044 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
The White House
Offline
Posted 8/26/17

sundin13 wrote:


Rujikin wrote:
I'd say the opposite is true. Thanks to the internet more people are becoming educated and are looking at facts instead of blindly being told what to think by the media. I've been seeing tons of former crazies starting to rethink and eventually change into someone who follows facts instead of the latest emotional fad.


I've seen just as many people wander into the deep end of Youtube conspiracy videos and come out a different person.

We've reached the point where there is so much information and so much information that is directly contrary to other information, that it is becoming more difficult to discover what is actually true. I think people are becoming more knowledgeable, not more educated (though I may just be using synonyms and pretending they are different for the sake of discussion). People are acquiring more information about the world, some true, some false, however, they are not reaching a point where this information is enabling them to find the truth and make decisions based upon that truth.


Thats why seeing different information in important. There is tons of information and that information will say different and opposing things. However there is so much information that if your willing to look then you will find the truth instead of just relying on someone else to tell you the Truth and what you should think.
15750 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M
Offline
Posted 8/26/17

Rujikin wrote:


sundin13 wrote:


Rujikin wrote:
I'd say the opposite is true. Thanks to the internet more people are becoming educated and are looking at facts instead of blindly being told what to think by the media. I've been seeing tons of former crazies starting to rethink and eventually change into someone who follows facts instead of the latest emotional fad.


I've seen just as many people wander into the deep end of Youtube conspiracy videos and come out a different person.

We've reached the point where there is so much information and so much information that is directly contrary to other information, that it is becoming more difficult to discover what is actually true. I think people are becoming more knowledgeable, not more educated (though I may just be using synonyms and pretending they are different for the sake of discussion). People are acquiring more information about the world, some true, some false, however, they are not reaching a point where this information is enabling them to find the truth and make decisions based upon that truth.


Thats why seeing different information in important. There is tons of information and that information will say different and opposing things. However there is so much information that if your willing to look then you will find the truth instead of just relying on someone else to tell you the Truth and what you should think.


I think it is arguable that you will find the truth if you look for it and highly unlikely that anything but the smallest fraction of people would actually put in the work to find it if it was attainable.

But that's just me.
23044 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
The White House
Offline
Posted 8/26/17

sundin13 wrote:


Rujikin wrote:


sundin13 wrote:


Rujikin wrote:
I'd say the opposite is true. Thanks to the internet more people are becoming educated and are looking at facts instead of blindly being told what to think by the media. I've been seeing tons of former crazies starting to rethink and eventually change into someone who follows facts instead of the latest emotional fad.


I've seen just as many people wander into the deep end of Youtube conspiracy videos and come out a different person.

We've reached the point where there is so much information and so much information that is directly contrary to other information, that it is becoming more difficult to discover what is actually true. I think people are becoming more knowledgeable, not more educated (though I may just be using synonyms and pretending they are different for the sake of discussion). People are acquiring more information about the world, some true, some false, however, they are not reaching a point where this information is enabling them to find the truth and make decisions based upon that truth.


Thats why seeing different information in important. There is tons of information and that information will say different and opposing things. However there is so much information that if your willing to look then you will find the truth instead of just relying on someone else to tell you the Truth and what you should think.


I think it is arguable that you will find the truth if you look for it and highly unlikely that anything but the smallest fraction of people would actually put in the work to find it if it was attainable.

But that's just me.


At one point in time I used to argue and debate against conservatives as I was taught they were evil. They kept posting links to statistics and other facts that literally broke the nonsense I was taught growing up. I found myself wanting to resort to insults like much of the left does today but I knew that at that point I had lost. So I read their links and tried to debunk it then ended up getting convinced by it because it was logical. Then I went out and learned

I've met a great many people like me and it is happening more and more.
15750 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M
Offline
Posted 8/26/17

Rujikin wrote:
At one point in time I used to argue and debate against conservatives as I was taught they were evil. They kept posting links to statistics and other facts that literally broke the nonsense I was taught growing up. I found myself wanting to resort to insults like much of the left does today but I knew that at that point I had lost. So I read their links and tried to debunk it then ended up getting convinced by it because it was logical. Then I went out and learned

I've met a great many people like me and it is happening more and more.


I've actually had a pretty similar experience. Not so much that I learned that conservatives were evil, but more that I was suddenly shown the faults in arguments that were previously left unchallenged through channels like Sargon and tl;dr.

That said, uderstanding the faults in one argument actually can lead you to being more susceptible to missing the faults in the argument that got you there. The trap here is that many people just trade in one dogmatic belief system for another without understanding that it is the method that should be followed, not the ideas.
Banned
1273 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
101 / O / bendover
Offline
Posted 8/26/17
First  Prev  1  2  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.