Has political correctness actually gone mad?

Thank f*ck for that...
 
The Daily Stormer telling folks how to fight the political correctness of Twitter -

And look.

We’re not done with Twitter.

We’ve got a big campaign coming up.

When you have time, create a fake black person account. Just go on black Twitter and see what they look like, copy that model. Start filling it with rap videos and booty-shaking or whatever else these blacks post. Read through their posts to get an idea of how they post. You need to be able to post in a manner which is indistinguishable from normal black tweeters.

We already have nearly a thousand of these accounts with post histories, so it won’t matter that some of yours are going to be new.

Twitter is about to learn what happens when you mess with Republicans.
Click to expand...

Full Article: http://www.dailystormer.com/twitter-begins-purge-of-republican-accounts/
 
That speech video is pathetic. Shapiro is an asshole but when did curtailing free speech became part of liberal agenda? It is the right that is supposed to shout down the opinions they don't like.
 
horsechoker said:
He's right-wing
Click to expand...

Bill.s.preston said:
Ok.

I listened to him from roughly 39 minutes in (After the protests) upto 58 minutes and he seems to argue his points quite reasonably. He makes the odd cheap shot joke, but nothing over the top. My interpretation on this sort of thing is that you wait for the Q&A if you disagree with his opinion and make your counter arguments. Make him look silly by disproving his views, rather than standing around shouting "shame".
Click to expand...

Not sure if serious.

He obviously comes from a very biased place. He spent good part of what I could muster to hear talking about how any discrimination against minorities in US is exaggerated. His ideas vehemently do need to be opposed but not by shutting down his free speech.
 
OMG have just come across Milo Yiannopoulos (I knew of him but hadn't really paid attention). He is utterly spot on!
 
Member 5225 said:
OMG have just come across Milo Yiannopoulos (I knew of him but hadn't really paid attention). He is utterly spot on!
Click to expand...
Err what? You realise he does the exact things we criticise on this thread right? Namely leading twitter mobs before getting banned for it. He's the perfect example of

"racist thing"
"that's racist"
"MAH FREE SPEECH"
 
I disagree with some things he says (though agree with others), and while I do think he's a bit of a dick, I can't help but quite like him.
 
Silva said:
Err what? You realise he does the exact things we criticise on this thread right? Namely leading twitter mobs before getting banned for it. He's the perfect example of

"racist thing"
"that's racist"
"MAH FREE SPEECH"
Click to expand...
Racist thing? More like 'an opinion based on what he sees and facts which may/may not seem racist to other people'
 
He has charisma. He makes a lot of bold claims about feminism etc and quotes 'science' to back him up. I would be interested to see if his sources are credible. I am sceptical. I can't be bothered with Breitbart though, it is appalling journalism, preaching to the choir and is very childish. They are very effective in weaponising the approach of the left for their cause, however.
 
Silva said:
He incited a twitter mob to racially abuse Leslie Jones.
Click to expand...
I saw an interview on that, he said some stuff, and people reacted to what he said (to her) - he says he can't and won't police the 300m ppl on twitter!
 
A run for high office during my lifetime....it's likely IMO (considering where the world is going these days!). I don't even say that in jest!
 
Member 5225 said:
I saw an interview on that, he said some stuff, and people reacted to what he said (to her) - he says he can't and won't police the 300m ppl on twitter!
Click to expand...

If you have a particular following and incite people to do something then, yes, you have a certain level of responsibility, however small.
 
Cheesy said:
If you have a particular following and incite people to do something then, yes, you have a certain level of responsibility, however small.
Click to expand...
'incited' how? by saying 'go on comrades, start attacking her' I think not.
 
Member 5225 said:
'incited' how? by saying 'go on comrades, start attacking her' I think not.
Click to expand...

From what I've read he accused her of being deployed to play the victim when she was receiving abuse. That's quite clearly him inciting his followers. It's not as bad as those giving out the abuse, granted, but I'd suspect he had a rather decent idea of what he was doing.

For all his supposed anti-liberalness and anti-left sentiment though, his uproar after having his Twitter banned and his over-exaggerated martyrdom kinds of highlights that he and his types are exactly the types they criticise: over-dramatic and focused on their own petty conflicts instead of on wider issues, and ultimately engaged in their own, cult-like social circles to which they adhere entirely.
 
I can't help but like Milo. Don't agree with his views on guns or atheism, but when it comes to stuff like modern feminism, grievance culture and non-platforming he is spot on.

Just read an article about him being invited by his old school to give a talk to sixth formers, and people openly saying he should be non-platformed because he might "radicalize these kids into white supremacists"... makes me embarrassed to be British. If even Trump and Brexit can't teach these loons the value of debate and free speech, then there's truly no hope for them.
 
Last edited:
Cheesy said:
From what I've read he accused her of being deployed to play the victim when she was receiving abuse. That's quite clearly him inciting his followers. It's not as bad as those giving out the abuse, granted, but I'd suspect he had a rather decent idea of what he was doing.

For all his supposed anti-liberalness and anti-left sentiment though, his uproar after having his Twitter banned and his over-exaggerated martyrdom kinds of highlights that he and his types are exactly the types they criticise: over-dramatic and focused on their own petty conflicts instead of on wider issues, and ultimately engaged in their own, cult-like social circles to which they adhere entirely.
Click to expand...
I won't pursue this further as I honestly just don't know enough about the case/accusation.
From what I'm hearing of him though, he's defo got that 'omg he's outrageous, but somehow I think I kind of secretly agree with some of his points' about him, a bit like Brexit and Trump!
 
Classical Mechanic said:
He has charisma. He makes a lot of bold claims about feminism etc and quotes 'science' to back him up. I would be interested to see if his sources are credible. I am sceptical. I can't be bothered with Breitbart though, it is appalling journalism, preaching to the choir and is very childish. They are very effective in weaponising the approach of the left for their cause, however.
Click to expand...

Yep. He definitely picks and choose his sources to suit his agenda but agree with everything you say.
 
crappycraperson said:
Not sure if serious.

He obviously comes from a very biased place. He spent good part of what I could muster to hear talking about how any discrimination against minorities in US is exaggerated. His ideas vehemently do need to be opposed but not by shutting down his free speech.
Click to expand...

That's part of his point and he argued it quite reasonably and quoted figures/studies and statistics.

That's how discussions and debates happen isn't it? You don't have to agree with what somebody says, but you can listen to their arguments. Well, 20 minutes of it in my case!
 
Missed C4N last night but just watched the Milo segment. I dont think Cathy really landed any punches on him, though I didnt think his explanation for his comment about "post truth politics" really rang true. Difficult in such a sort interview because you'd have to keep going back and asking him to elaborate on his evasions.

Interesting that they didnt interview the two journalists together but did them consecutively.
 
Adebesi said:
Missed C4N last night but just watched the Milo segment. I dont think Cathy really landed any punches on him, though I didnt think his explanation for his comment about "post truth politics" really rang true. Difficult in such a sort interview because you'd have to keep going back and asking him to elaborate on his evasions.

Interesting that they didnt interview the two journalists together but did them consecutively.
Click to expand...
Yeah that was odd!
They'd probably worried he'd annihilate her!
 
Member 5225 said:
I just happened to stumble into watching his interview on Channel4 news this evening that made me explore his other videos btw. Here it is:
https://www.channel4.com/news/milo-yiannopolous-questioned-on-donald-trump-and-stephen-bannon
Click to expand...

Haha! He's going bald. That might explain a lot of his inner rage.

I like listening to him. He talks an awful lot of bollox but he's articulate and interesting. It's just a shame you so rarely see someone who is as bright and articulate as him but has different views really take him on in a debate. I listened to him on the Joe Rogan podcats and you could drive a fecking bus through some of his arguments and if that could happen in public on a regular basis I think he would lose a lot of his appeal. Mind you, one of the many joys of life in the digital age is that people spend so much time repeatedly arguing about the same old shit online that they end up utterly entrenched and beyond the possibility of learning that they might be wrong about certain things.
 
Adebesi said:
Yep, Ive seen him do that to a couple of lightweight leftwingers. As Pogue said, would be really good to see him matched up against someone who could take him on.
Click to expand...

I reckon he'd lose his shite completely and start saying increasingly outrageous shit to try and get a rise out of them. Would be very entertaining.
 
There's a clip from that Nicky Campbell show The Big Questions in which Milo is talking about the gender imbalances having flipped in the past ten years. Though you may disagree with some of the points he makes his style of pissing everyone off makes for magnetic viewing. At one point he gets interrupted and replies 'we're talking about men, darling' and everyone loses their minds. I don't agree with everything he says but the dude's got style.
 
I find Milo quite inauthentic. I get the idea of being a provocateur but it loses a lot of it's effectiveness when it's so obvious. In particular his being a "Christian" is transparently a facade. Saw him on Rogan claiming that exercise was pointless if you're morbidly obese :rolleyes:

He's a good debater, haven't seen him get flustered very often at all which is impressive.
 
soap said:
I find Milo quite inauthentic. I get the idea of being a provocateur but it loses a lot of it's effectiveness when it's so obvious. In particular his being a "Christian" is transparently a facade. Saw him on Rogan claiming that exercise was pointless if you're morbidly obese :rolleyes:

He's a good debater, haven't seen him get flustered very often at all which is impressive.
Click to expand...

I don't think he is inauthentic. He is a 'provocateur' because he needs attention to breathe, positive or negative. That is his modus operandi and he is quite brilliant at it.
 
He's definitely reinvented himself for American college audiences. I remember seeing him on Free Speech in 2012 debating Scottish higher education and gay marriage. He was up against idiots but came across very meek and polite, the model of a cuckservative, as he might say now. Don't think there's any chance that Milo of 2012 gave a shit about conservative religious values or guns, or America.

Still, his new form is a necessary evil in the current political climate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.