Milo Yiannopoulos and a group of democratic socialists walk into a bar - Sensationalist Headlines

Actual sources on this. And not him trolling. Him genuinely believing full fledged Nazi ideology. One is guilt by association. The weakest of arguments. First off, why don't you show me where I've claimed any party pushing legislation. If not, you're pulling assumptions out of your ass. Second, they aren't powerful words anymore. Accusations of sexism and racism are met with eyerolls more now than they ever were, and it's not because it's more prevalent than ever.

Oh i don't push party legislation, i just play devil's advocate every single time they do something fucking stupid and get called out for it. Get fuckin real, you're about as transparent as a glass door lol. The only people who eyeroll at racist and sexism claims are people like you who see no wrong in someone being a cunt for in either context, or tumblrinas (which are the minority believe it or not). And guilt by association works when you see him dressed with nazi referenced shit. Who knew saying the same shit nazis spout and "trolling" by wearing references to them, will cause people to call you a nazi. Lastly you have sources but say hes just trolling. How do you know hes trolling? do you have a direct line to him to ask every time he opens his mouth to ask if hes that stupid? If that's the case, if someone calls me a democrat, i can just say "lol i was trolling guize, it was a big joke". Basically the only argument you got is: https://i.imgur.com/n8umjWj.png What a load of tripe. Like they say, if it speaks like a duck, walks like a duck, swims like a duck, its a duck.

This guy both called the English flag the British flag and implied that British roast dinners are bad. This is an egregious crime in my eyes.

Self-victimisation is intended to create a futile situation where the choices are either look like the one in the wrong or shut up. Which is easier to follow through?

https://www.buzzfeed.com/josephbernstein/heres-how-breitbart-and-milo-smuggled-white-nationalism?utm_term=.reQm0EE63#.gaNm1wwWJ stop misrepresenting milo by saying he's not a nazi.

Funny how his career started with making fun of professional victims only to become exactly that.

And you're about as dense as lead. Some people don't fall into your nice little political dichotomy, no matter how many times you click your heels together and wish upon stars. But by all means, please continue being hilariously ill informed. Do you pay attention to anyone outside of your own bubble at all? Or do you just instantly discredit them as filthy know-nothings and pretend their opinions don't exist? Most people are able to understand this little thing called context and intent. Something tells me you have trouble with this. Because his entire spiel is to annoy and piss off people like you. He wants to be so much of an ass that it makes you foam at the mouth ready to bite. Everyone who has two brain cells to rub together knows that everything he does is to piss people off. He is a huge, giant, gaping cunt. But an actual Nazi he is not. Things are a little more complicated than that when you start talking about people and political ideologies. That's an extreme oversimplification. Shutting up and not giving them the attention and ammunition they need to gain more support is an excellent start. First off, this is a BuzzFeed article of all things. They are pretty close to being Gawker-tier crap. Also, the source they used directly flies in the face of what they are trying to convey in their own article. And this is all just "they are Nazis because I say they are, not because of any actual points that I will present in this article."

And you're about as dense as lead. Some people don't fall into your nice little political dichotomy, no matter how many times you click your heels together and wish upon stars. But by all means, please continue being hilariously ill informed. Its funny how you call me dense when anyone who's been here for more than a year knows your posting habits of constant devil advocate posts for this administration/party. Im just the kind of person who calls a spade a spade. Do you pay attention to anyone outside of your own bubble at all? Or do you just instantly discredit them as filthy know-nothings and pretend their opinions don't exist? I don't know, the only person here who's in their bubble is the person saying racism and sexism claims are mostly overblown, when majority of the time its completely justified. For someone whining about watering down terms, you sure act like it doesn't happen as frequently and is a non issue. Most people are able to understand this little thing called context and intent. Something tells me you have trouble with this. What context? Going to a nazi club to talk shit about the left and minorities is suddenly ironic irl shitposting? Is going on known alt right talk shows that discuss racist bullshit myths and agreeing with said myths to spread more fearmongering is being a troll? lol please save me the mental gymnastics for this one. Because his entire spiel is to annoy and piss off people like you. He wants to be so much of an ass that it makes you foam at the mouth ready to bite. Everyone who has two brain cells to rub together knows that everything he does is to piss people off. He is a huge, giant, gaping cunt. But an actual Nazi he is not. Back at it again with "he just acts, thinks, and perpetuates the racist sexist bullshit just so he can be a troll" nonsense. The world isn't an internet forum where you can run around spouting bullshit and hide behind "i was only trolling lol" when people call you out. If he does a bunch of shit that makes him sound/look/act like a nazi, guess what, hes a fucking nazi. Things are a little more complicated than that when you start talking about people and political ideologies. That's an extreme oversimplification. Except it isn't, Majority of humans judge people and label them by actions. You keep going to the bullshit excuse of "hes just trolling lol" with no evidence other than kinda his word. If you caught a dude who was a serial killer and was talking for months about killing his victims, would you believe him if he suddenly went "lol I was just kidding haha"? Shutting up and not giving them the attention and ammunition they need to gain more support is an excellent start. As soon as milo feels that hes not comfortable in the general public, same with other dickheads like him, the more likely they will fuck off or go back to their caves where they belong. Allowing them to run around and spread fearmongering/fake news is just going to garner more attention and followers. That's their entire agenda to get followers, drag people in with false info and fearmongering, then have them spread the same bullshit to others. I should know, because Ive talked to two people who bought into his lies specifically in one of his "trolling" appearances. Just because you feel like hes just trolling, doesn't mean others feel or see it that way when an mountain of media shows otherwise.

Too bad you have no clue how to recognize a spade. That's become abundantly clear. Never said that it doesn't happen frequently or that actual racism and sexism is a non-issue. Don't worry. You'll either dismiss any explanation, or it will go right over your head I'm sure. Whatever you say pal. It's not a bullshit excuse when it's the truth. The fact that you're falling for it says more about you than it does about him. And there is a mountain of media that shows that he is a massive troll. You just choose to dismiss it because "lol, he's really a Nazi in disguise!" And making him look like the victim does not make people like him fuck off. It only empowers them. If you haven't figured this out by now, then you're purposefully ignoring reality.

Silence back at it again with "he says hes a troll" excuse. Im not going to bother debating with you if you're going to spat out the same bullshit defense for his actions every single time with the only proof being his word about it. Let me know how getting out of a ticket works for you when you say "i was only kidding officer".

you make some good points @Silence but I posit this to you: when has ignoring something ever made it go away? do you honestly believe that someone like Milo fucking Yiannopoulos will just throw his hands up in the air in defeat when nobody buys into his latest scandal? he's a professional agitator; if it's not one thing, he'll find another thing. @MinstrelKnight hits it square on the head; it's a 100% lose lose situation. either allow him and his cronies unrestrained access to spout their vitriolic garbage, or people take action to stop them infecting more of society and in the process they "feed the troll".

We have different goals, and that's the fundamental difference. You want him to stop and go away. The truth is that he won't stop spewing his shit, and I think people are fools to try and make him. BUT, what we CAN do is not give him a springboard back into the spotlight. I didn't hear shit about Milo for MONTHS until this happened. I think that simple fact speaks VOLUMES. And speaking as someone who USED to be what many on here consider far right, attacking someone like Rush Limbaugh (who I used to listen to every day) like we do Milo wouldn't have changed my mind about him or my political views at the time, it would have only enshrined me. What moved me away from all of that nonsense was people on here presenting the real facts in a way that wasn't alienating or confrontational. The truth works. That's why I think shit like this is stupid. Because back then, if I would have seen this, It would have pushed me farther away, not brought me in. And it infuriates me how many people refuse to accept that because being patient denies them their penis-enlarging instant gratification that ends up doing more harm than good.

Honestly, posts like this is the real problem I see. You'd assume, and defend the assumptions you make for days and days. If someone stands for free speech, doesn't it make sense that they have to defend even the aspects of it they don't personally like, to stick with the principle? If you assume, as you have, that anyone who argues points you don't like defending things you don't like is just a member of your political opposition, you've already locked yourself off from honest discussion.

That doesn't work. You want to know what does work and was recently demonstrated with the Alt-Right's collapse? Showing up in solidarity, unity and numbers to quiet them down in voices of dissent. This modern idea that going about it stoic and quiet, ignoring them in your quiet protest doesn't work. Hasn't worked. And will never work because if you do not make your voice heard you can easily become the 'silent majority' that they often venerate will side with them when the time comes. Also months? The reason things went quiet was because he got caught no only with his pants down with the release of the original draft and literal joke fuel that it actually was embarrasing him to no end. But also Charlotsville happened, so he made himself scarce. Ignoring the sheer insanity gives tacit validation because these people are lost in conspiracy theories. They need to be dragged out with facts and being blatantly told they're wrong. Its the only I was able to crawl out of the fucking 9/11 truther cesspit.

The only way you can make Milo go away is to exercise your right to dislike him, and ignore him. Doubling down on your hatred of the guy is great and all as he is literally human garbage, but a figure that thrives on controversy really only gets his way when people get so vehement about their hatred of him.

You don't need to hate him? He's like Trump, you need to deflate his ego and narcissim. A perfect example, again was the manuscript. Seriously, stop saying ignoring works. It doesn't. That's the same flawed logic that lead to so many problems in so many ways.

Do whatever the fuck you want to Milo as long as it's not violent, and I don't really care What I care about is people on the left, looking at other people on the left like Geel, and saying "Oh jeeze, you express opinions I don't agree with lock step, so therefore you're actually a member of the deep right" as papaya and killuah both did without anyone even raising a fucking eyebrow. Cool, we have differences in opinions, I don't see the need, value, or point of using labels to dismiss ideas and thoughts off hand like that, and I doubt anyone actually would have a valid reasoning for it absent their political motivations to do so.

Not all ideas are worth hearing, ideas from conspriacy theories and nazi based propaganda are not so much ideas as they are infections that need to be removed. There's disagreeing and then there's thinking genocide is a good answer.

I don't need to think an idea is good, or worth hearing to defend it's right to exist as a free speech advocate Call me whatever the fuck you want, call me stupid or deluded or a fucking member of the alt-right for disagreeing with you on this point. I fully understand the implication of nazi ideology, and I fully understand why this is wrong, and fully agree with it, but I will never support the government or a authority banning it. I do, and will support the publics ability to make it known they don't want to hear this, or don't like it, but I will never be okay with actual censorship mandating these points of view are illegal to discuss. The fact you said "there's disagreeing and there's thinking genocide is a good answer" is a false dichotomy that would be hard for anyone on the recieving end of it to not feel like they were just called a nazi. So, why do you feel the need to call me a nazi at the drop of a hat because I'm not arguing the same point of view? Because I worry about the polarization of my own political ideology and those around me and the loss of intelligble discourse at the hands of sensationalist and "Gotcha" type mentalities?

Also, people who follow him dont see him as a troll at all, They actually believe the bullshit he spews.

About the same amount of time you spend making hyperbolic shitposts.

That isn't a hyperbolic shitpost that you're responding to. They're right. I don't think you are a white supremacist, but you spend a disproportionate amount of time playing devil's advocate for them. It's usually a logical, reasonable (albeit unpopular and in defense of an unpopular group) stance at first but it often evolves into a more unreasonably apologetic-sounding stance as the discussion progresses due to you doggedly sticking to your guns instead of attempting to fully address what people are saying and explain what you were trying to say in a way that they're more likely to listen to.

Silence also spends a lot of time repeating the same type of argument which usually boils down to, "don't react to <insert bad people here>, it'll just allow them to paint themselves as victims!". Like, this line of argumentation is so common in his weird defenses of unquestionably shitty groups/people. Who cares if Milo makes himself out as a victim?? Tolerating and being kind to ideological filth isn't going to make the far-right suddenly stop painting themselves as victims, and we know that for a fact because there's an ever-expanding library of cases where people on the right try to pretend the left is this vicious attack dog over innocuous, stupid non-issues. Someone who supports, defends and hangs out with literal Nazis and white supremacists seems like a fair candidate to call a Nazi or at the very least a Nazi-sympathizer. People hate Milo for more than his bad Twitter habits and his rants about feminists, you know.

It is, because I'm not a white supremacy apologist. I've never excused white supremacy as an ideology or anything like that. That is hyperbole meant to insult/shame/zing me. The post itself is the definition of a shitpost. I have not apologized for Milo being a cunt in here. I just don't think he's an actual Nazi. I think that's a bit of a stretch, although not a terribly hard stretch to make. And so what if I play devil's advocate? Just because I dislike someone doesn't mean that I have to abandon my principles, or that I have to automatically disagree with anything they say or do. As for the rest of the post, people will get out what they put in. People think that treating cunts like cunts is fine, so nobody should be upset, right?

Constantly playing devil's advocate for one side and never doing it for the other makes you appear to be an apologist. It just does, even if that's not what you are. You don't need to automatically disagree with someone, but it is very strange how you consistently defend one side without err. People get out what they put in. Yes. But if you want to have productive discussion and you want to hold an unpopular opinion, you need to take a lot of care in making sure that You're properly understood, because people can and will read your post as whatever makes you look the worst if the post is ambiguous at all The limits of your statement are well laid out That you are the calmest person in the discussion. You've experienced this yourself, 4-5 people being feisty at you makes meaningful discussion nearly impossible. When you're arguing for an unpopular opinion, or one that sounds unpopular on the surface level, you have to be careful to make sure that people actually read what you're saying and not what they think you're saying. Yeah, it's not "fair", but them's the breaks. The popular side gets to make base, tripe arguments and you have to either ignore or refute them calmly or else you're just going to galvanize everyone else. t. someone who plays devil's advocate fairly frequently without making people hate me

Tucker is always a massive cunt but I was inspired to look into his history and upbringing after he made probably the 19th consecutive "rich kids" joke at the expense of the bar crowd who kicked Milo out, shitting on them for being Democratic Socialists and yet daring to eat at a mid-range New York bar and insinuating repeatedly that they're all trust-fund rich kids who are just spoiled and stupid. Anyway, I looked at Tucker's wiki page and here's what I found: Carlson was born in San Francisco, California, the elder son of Richard Warner Carlson, a former Los Angeles news anchor and U.S. ambassador to the Seychelles, who was also president of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and director of Voice of America. His mother is the former Lisa McNear Lombardi,[4] and his stepmother is the former Patricia Caroline Swanson, an heiress to the Swanson frozen-food fortune (daughter of Gilbert Carl Swanson and granddaughter of Carl A. Swanson) and a niece of Senator J. William Fulbright.[5] He has a brother, Buckley Swanson Peck Carlson. According to a profile in People magazine, "Tucker and younger brother Buckley were raised in La Jolla, California, by their father and stepmother, Patricia, after their mother left home when Tucker was 6."[6]While living in La Jolla, California, Tucker briefly attended La Jolla Country Day School before relocating to the East Coast. He attended St. George's School, a boarding school in Middletown, Rhode Island. After graduation, he studied at Trinity College in Hartford, Connecticut, and graduated in 1992 with a B.A. in history. So.. Tucker Carlson, who regularly shits on young adults for being spoiled, trust fund, leeching off their parents, etc., was born in San Francisco, CA. His daddy was an LA news anchor, a U.S. ambassador, president of Corporation for Public Broadcasting and director of Voice of America. His step-mother was an heiress to a massive frozen-food fortune, and a niece to an influential U.S. senator. He grew up in La Jolla, an affluent Californian city, went to boarding school in Middletown, and studied at a prestigious, private liberal arts college in Hartford, Connecticut. This is the man that is on television telling you that Democratic Socialists are hypocritical trust funders who have never worked a day in their lives..

To be fair if he's going to be critical of what he considers unprincipled tactics on a side, it would be the case that on this forum the sort of news that gets posted usually turns out the same way. I certainly know for myself that I find myself arguing with other liberals a lot more compared to real life where I usually argue against right wingers. Those three points are completely spot on, but sadly the first one overshadows anything you can try to do. People took such a hard stance in this thread that any sort of exchange of ideas felt completely one sided. It's just people who really, really want it to be okay to not have to behave just because they don't like someone - which is fine, feel free to do whatever - but then also reject the obvious potential conseques because they feel it's justified. As if whether or not it's justified was even the point of the argument.

I don't highlight his background to say that you're not allowed to criticize spoiled kids, but it's incredibly hypocritical to be making these baseless criticisms and labeling other people as spoiled trust-funders when you yourself are, essentially, a spoiled trust-funder.

The entire point of free speech is that you don't get to decide what opinions people "get" to share. Free speech was never meant to protect speech that most people liked. It was created to protect ideas that people hate. Sometimes, you have a good thing that also allows a bad thing. And you need to weigh whether you like that good thing more than you want to get rid of the bad thing.

They shared their opinion that he wasn't welcome there