Leftist Riot Du Jour - UC Berkeley

[Forty Two]

LOL - You live in a fantasy world.

[pErvinalia]

In any of these protests you get people who believe in the right of people to protest against what they believe to be wrongs. You also get fucking hooligans who are there to seek attention and cause as much damage under the guise of protesting, it just gives them a stage to perform in. In Canada we get fucking hockey riots where gangs of criminals come to break things and steal and burn. The worst troublemakers care nothing for the reason for the protest, they are there to perform and, hopefully, to loot. They are going to a protest for personal gain, they'll be at a republican protest, democrat, leftist and islamic protest with their faces covered. They should be shot on sight, or at least trashed by the legitimate protesters. If I organized a protest, I'd have my own security there with 24"X1" galvanized pipe nipples at hand to keep order.

So a right to protest, as long as it is in a way in which you approve? Authoritarianism FTW!

You bet, comrade! No looting from shops, no destruction of property of innocent bystanders. The people who are being protested against couldn't care less when they are not affected, it just gives them a chance to point their fingers at ALL the protesters as being hooligans and illegitimate. Now, firebombing these leaders' homes, assassinating them and their family members, and bombing and burning their factories and business outlets might be a more acceptable and noteworthy form of protest. Why waste your time and energy on protests that achieve nothing, when you can really fuck things up by surgical insurrection!

I was more concerned about your decree that protester with their faces covered should be shot on sight.

Actually, just read today that one state in Australia is trying to introduce much stiffer penalties if you break some law at a protest while your face is covered. I'll give them credit for trying to avoid the usual fascist tactic of trying to outright ban facemasks (and indeed some types of protests altogether). B+ for creative law making.

[Hermit]

You can't express all viewpoints freely under the law (like shouting "bomb" on a plane).

Just imagine the scene. A planeload of panicked, airborne passengers rushing all exits and opening them in order to avoid the explosion. It's fit for a Monty Python skit.

[pErvinalia]

That wouldn't happen if they were all liberals. They'd all approach the person and tell him that they respect his view that blowing up the plane would be a good thing. They'd then offer him a cup of tea and a biscuit.

[Woodbutcher]

If you can't show your face when protesting, then you have no right to protest. If you hide your face when doing something it means you know you have no legitimate right to be there. It also gives you a chance to do harm anonymously. I'd be wearing my union jacket with my name stitched on the arm.

[Brian Peacock]

Any chance you could define these "leftists" that you keep insisting want and believe all this stuff that you attribute to them? Who are these people, and what, if anything, separates a "leftist" from someone on the left of the political spectrum? Basically, what the fuck is a "leftist"?

He's dodged that bullet already.

[Forty Two]

That wouldn't happen if they were all liberals. They'd all approach the person and tell him that they respect his view that blowing up the plane would be a good thing. They'd then offer him a cup of tea and a biscuit.

You seem to be unable to understand the difference between the right to speak a viewpoint, and an obligation on the part of everyone else to agree or respect that view. Everyone having the right to express a viewpoint includes the right to ridicule viewpoints expressed by others.

Also, shouting bomb on a plane and and such is not an expression of a viewpoint, but rather is causing a panic by falsely stating there was a bomb, or trying to make people think there is a bomb there. Obviously, if a person actually has a bomb, then his statement that he has the bomb is true, but would be part of his plan or scheme to hijack or destroy the aircraft. But, it's not the mere verbalizing of the words that is at issue -- in any case, it's the action of disrupting a flight or threatening actions that are the crime.

Further, the bomb issue doesn't say anything about whether someone's racist view, or sexist view, or some other viewpoint can be prohibited.

[Forty Two]

Any chance you could define these "leftists" that you keep insisting want and believe all this stuff that you attribute to them? Who are these people, and what, if anything, separates a "leftist" from someone on the left of the political spectrum? Basically, what the fuck is a "leftist"?

He's dodged that bullet already.

I defined it -- I defined it far more clearly than pErvin defined "rightists." But, it's only when talking about leftists and Muslims do we suddenly find it impossible to refer to people in group terms. Nobody knows what a leftist or a Muslim is.

[Hermit]

shouting bomb on a plane and and such is not an expression of a viewpoint, but rather is causing a panic by falsely stating there was a bomb, or trying to make people think there is a bomb there. Obviously, if a person actually has a bomb, then his statement that he has the bomb is true, but would be part of his plan or scheme to hijack or destroy the aircraft. But, it's not the mere verbalizing of the words that is at issue -- in any case, it's the action of disrupting a flight or threatening actions that are the crime.

Crap. The person was just economical with the truth. There's no law against lying. Someone could shout: Thousands of Mexican rapists are crossing the border!" Would you panic? Of course not. Unless you were a moron, you'd just calmly ask: "You got evidence for that?"

[JimC]

And your reply is a non-sequitur. Those "leftists" weren't burning a liberal's sign. They were burning a rightists sign, because as you yourself point out, the rightists are rank hypocrites.

Who are these rightists you're referring to? Can you define them?

Bigoted Trump supporters.

I don't like that phrase, rEv.

It implies that there could be non-bigoted Trump supporters...

[laklak]

If someone shouts "there's a bomb on the plane!" or "active shooter in the movie theater!" I don't think I'd be calmly asking for evidence.

[Brian Peacock]

Any chance you could define these "leftists" that you keep insisting want and believe all this stuff that you attribute to them? Who are these people, and what, if anything, separates a "leftist" from someone on the left of the political spectrum? Basically, what the fuck is a "leftist"?

He's dodged that bullet already.

I defined it...

Sorry, I must have missed that. Got a link?

[Hermit]

If someone shouts "there's a bomb on the plane!" or "active shooter in the movie theater!" I don't think I'd be calmly asking for evidence.

The knife I was using had two cutting edges. Too subtely expressed?

[pErvinalia]

If you can't show your face when protesting, then you have no right to protest.

Authoritarianism FTW!

If you hide your face when doing something it means you know you have no legitimate right to be there.

Rubbish.

[pErvinalia]

That wouldn't happen if they were all liberals. They'd all approach the person and tell him that they respect his view that blowing up the plane would be a good thing. They'd then offer him a cup of tea and a biscuit.

You seem to be unable to understand the difference between the right to speak a viewpoint, and an obligation on the part of everyone else to agree or respect that view. Everyone having the right to express a viewpoint includes the right to ridicule viewpoints expressed by others.

Also, shouting bomb on a plane and and such is not an expression of a viewpoint, but rather is causing a panic by falsely stating there was a bomb, or trying to make people think there is a bomb there. Obviously, if a person actually has a bomb, then his statement that he has the bomb is true, but would be part of his plan or scheme to hijack or destroy the aircraft. But, it's not the mere verbalizing of the words that is at issue -- in any case, it's the action of disrupting a flight or threatening actions that are the crime.

If someone, particularly of middle eastern look, said out loud "I'd like to blow this plane up", he would be punched in the face by the state. Freedum!