Academia, Bizarre, Constitutional Law, Free Speech, Society

Protesters Torch Free Speech At Berkeley In Latest Example of Mob Rule On America’s College Campuses

milo_yiannopoulos_journalist_broadcaster_and_entrepreneur-1441_8961808556_croppedSeal_of_University_of_California,_Berkeley.svgWe recently discussed the courageous stand of the University of Chicago in favor of free speech (a position followed by schools like Purdue). Free speech is being rapidly diminished on our campuses as an ever-widening scope of speech has been declared hate speech or part of the ill-defined “microaggression.” Now Berkeley has shown the world exactly what this intolerance looks like as protesters attacked people, burned property, and rioted to stop other people from hearing the views of a conservative speaker. As on so many campuses, they succeeded. The speech by Milo Yiannopoulos was cancelled. A triumph of anti-speech protesters. Berkeley now must face a defining moment. The only appropriate response for the school is to immediately reschedule the speaker and stand in defiance of those who want to deny the right to speak (and to hear and associate) to others. Moreover, it is liberals who should be on the forefront in denouncing these protests and the effort to stop this event. Otherwise, it can follow the lead of schools like DePaul and cast aside free speech in yielding to the mob.

Berkeley has previously been a battleground over effective speech codes and an example of the crackdown on free speech on college campuses as administrators punish any speech deemed insensitive or the still ill-defined category of “microaggressions.” One of the greatest concerns is the double standard showed to different speakers based on their content. The University of California at Berkeley is the most recent example of this controversy. In columns for the Daily Californian titled “Speaking Out”, “Fucking White Boys,” and “Choosing Myself Over White People”, Maggie Lam mocked and ridiculed white people. A column using such language mocking people of color would instantly trigger demands for expulsion.

Protesters not only succeeded in blocking others from hearing from this speaker but they then proceeded to riot and destroy property outside of campus. This is the result of years of academics declaring some speech as unworthy of protection and enabling students who believe that no one should be allowed to express views that they feel is discriminatory or demeaning or hateful.

Yiannopoulos is a gay conservative who is a popular speaker with his “Dangerous Faggot” talks. Hours before his event, protesters began throwing fireworks and destroying property to stop him from speaking. People who came to see him were reportedly attacked — an ironic twist for protesters who said that they wanted to fight hate speech. Protesters chanted “Milo has got to go” in an effort to prevent people from hearing his views.

Berkeley can yield to the mob and surrender free speech to a violent mob. Alternatively, it can reschedule the event and expel any students who engage in violence on campus. The choice is between being a place of learning and being a place of indoctrination. This is one of the truly great universities in the world and once the center of the fight for free speech in the 60s. At one time it was the students who stood bravely for free speech. Now it must be the faculty. I know little about this speaker and I have never read his work. I do not have to. There are those who want to hear from him. A college is a place where different voices should be heard. These protesters are the face of true intolerance. What they are attempting to do is inimical to the being essence of academic institutions.

Berkeley insists that the violence was committed by “outsiders.” I hope so. I have no problem with student protesters who disagree with a speaker. However, I wish that I would see just one college where a speaker like Yiannopoulos was protected by a line of “Liberals for Free Speech” who do not agree with him but support his right to speak. Those students who try to interrupt speakers or block doors (and we have seen many in the last couple years) are seeking to censor the speech of others.

Berkeley needs to bring this speaker back.

246 thoughts on “Protesters Torch Free Speech At Berkeley In Latest Example of Mob Rule On America’s College Campuses”

  1. One more shining example of the left’s, particularly in academia, tolerance, non violence, and love towards those with whom they disagree. Pretty much what we’ve come to accept as the norm for these diversity lovers. Diversity, that is, which agrees with them. Hmmm? Is that actually diversity at all?

  3. I don’t have convincing evidence for why such intolerance for free speech has grown on college campuses in recent years. Mostly, what I read are opinions about that issue. However, that is beside the main point that Pr. Turley suggests. Free speech at government institutions (except not too close to the Supreme Court building) is demanded and protected by the Constitution. If you disagree with a speaker, by all means protest, but in a way that does not interfere with the speaker’s ability to deliver her or his message. Otherwise, you are just another version of Big Brother.

  4. It is not getting much coverage, although the NYT did a piece last year. Baby boomer donors w/ the big bucks are not donating to their colleges because of all this horsesh!t.

  5. “I’m getting the vapors..I can’t believe liberals could be violent fascists.”

    Bill Burr, a great comedian, does a bit about how Hitler is considered the “Michael Jordan” of mass murderers. He murdered 8 million people. But Stalin 20 million and Mao 50 million are second ballot Hall of Fame mass murderers. GEE, I wonder why that is???

    1. The notion that Judaics deserve a special word “holocaust” for only them is among the most pure genetic racist ideologies extant. Right up there w/”_od’s (genetic) chosen people,” AKA “chosenites,” and Israel’s long-debated proposal to require every single citizen to sign and swear public allegiance to Israel being a “Jewish” State. Imagine the howls if citizens were required to swear allegiance to a Baptist or Muslim State.

      I hate fascists, even the Progressive US liberal elite types.

  6. My view is LET HIM SPEAK, This kind of mindless violence only plays into the alt right’s hands. I sometimes wonder if these violent “protestors” are paid by the other side….just a thought.

    2. Not sure anyone has to pay people to protest now. There seems to many people more than willing to protest and the protests are on going. Trump had to cancel his trip to Milwaukee yesterday because of protests. if Trump goes through with that anti-gay executive order, the protests will rapidly grow. Trump would be wise not to sign that document.

      2. Yes, there’s a company offering $2500.00 per month for 6 protests. They want young people who look diverse.

        That’s really, really cynical and destructive.

        1. Jill, re: “That’s really, really cynical and destructive.” Seems to be the MO for Democrats aka Liberals. They fall in line unquestioningly behind the cult of PC and then act out when others have a different POV. I like what you said earlier in that we need to “sane up”, but sigh, I do not see that happening.

          I sent out Jimmy Dore’s video “okay to bomb but not to ban” and my Lib friends went crazy. Accused me of believing conspiracy theories, They refuse to even look at other narratives. Until they can deal with facts (which they won’t) the Dems are doomed and these students are in for a rude awakening when they leave their sanctuary campuses.

          I just read that HRC is putting out a book of essays – “it takes a village” etc. Wonder how Hondurans, Syrians, Libyans, etc.would react to this book? I’m not generally in favor of book burning but if it’s released in their countries I would say it’s justified =)

  7. Berkeley has traveled a long road since the mid 1960’s and the Free Speech Movement.

    Here, we have clear evidence that being smart with high board scores is no guarantee of having insight or being thoughtful. It is ironic, isn’t it. Most any one of the rioters could have made strong arguments against Yiannopoulos.

    But I think they made a key mistake. If the anti speech activities were limited to shouting down Yiannopoulos then there might be the argument that the situation is entirely a campus matter for the university administration to handle.

    However, rioting off campus and destruction of property make this a LE issue and every bodies business. .

    Imagine that – calling for the man to protect free speech. Well, times change. Officer, do you duty.

  8. I can’t wait until a TRUE and intellectually honest liberal, Autumn, weighs in on this. She has championed Milo here for a long time.

    1. What progressive touts alt right Bannonite white nationalists? Inquiring minds want to know

      1. hard to say it’s a long ways out to the furthest reaches of the extreme list. No telling wha they are mutterinig about -or maybe just reciting their daily programming.

    2. Nick, I am a “Lefty”” for sure,b tu NOT a liberal rather a Progressive which allows me to entertain different POVs and examine them for merit (or lack thereof) – always trying to take into consideration that I have my own blinders. That’s why I love this blog – free speech and exposure to differing ideas. I think Jill fits in this category as well. I think Milo speaks well for himself as usual:

      1. Milo is on Bannon’s payroll. He and Steve thrive on creating chaos. Milo got what he wanted and that is publicity for the Breitbart brand.

      2. Autumn, Great link as usual. Progressives like yourself are being drowned out by the shrill, angry, voices of leftists. I am impressed w/ your perseverance.

        1. Thanks Nick! I will NEVER stop fighting for truth – and will take responsibility if I am in error. I am rapidly losing patience (and friends) because I refuse to shut up. So be it. Fahrenheit 451 anyone? =)

  9. I am no fan of what happened at Berkeley.

    However, your statement is totally inappropriate and outrageous from anyone, much less an academic of your intelligence:

    “This is the result of years of academics declaring some speech as unworthy of protection and enabling students who believe that no one should be allowed to express views that they feel is discriminatory or demeaning or hateful.”

    I hardly need to explain to you the many logic fallacies of this declaration. You should delete the entire screed, or at least this inflammatory and unsupported defamation.

    I am very disappointed in you for making that statement.

    1. Edward Grass is the classic, fascist trying to control the speech of our host by demanding he delete the truth because it hurts.

      “I am no fan of what happened @ Berkley.” I detect lies and liars for a living. That sir, is a flat ass lie.

      1. Yes, my suggestion saying Turley “should” delete unsupported defamation is modeled on Hitler’s politeness in exterminating intellectuals. No difference at all.

        I am as close to a free speech absolutist as you will find. Twenty years ago I wrote an appellate brief (with others) to the Court of Appeals in Maryland (the state’s highest court) to strike a commercial speech ban on ‘store closing sale’ advertisements when stores were not actually closing. We won. I helped research projects about lifting bans on television drug advertisements. I could go on. What have you done to support free speech, Keyboard Kommando?

        So your unsupported guess and sliming via internet could not be wrong about the accuracy of my intent or statements. Dimwit.

        1. And I might add, Mr. Spinelli, since you apparently don’t get this, one key aspect of free speech is using more free speech to criticize people when you think they are wrong, including suggesting to them that they have made an error that should be corrected. I know and very much like Pr. Turley. As I said I was very disappointed by his statement, given my favorable opinion and knowledge of him, and I think he will regret and want to correct the quoted statement if he thinks about it further.

          1. What kind of a nut are you??? You said, “I hardly need to explain to you the many logic fallacies of this declaration. You should delete the entire screed, or at least this inflammatory and unsupported defamation.”

            Maybe you ” hardly need to explain” is really that you can’t explain the “logical fallacies”, because there aren’t any. Sooo you will just pretend that it is screamingly obvious, and hope nobody catches your trick.

            Fat chance of that around here, Dude! You are just a liberal Democrat who wants to excuse the neo-fascist behaviour of your little proteges. Just like swm.

            Squeeky Fromm
            Girl Reporter

            1. Squeek, In one comment, Edward Grass, Esq. says to JT, “You should DELETE the entire screed.” Then, in another comment has the temerity to say, “I am as close to a free speech absolutist as you will find.” LOL! We know this ambulance chaser would delete the comment if this were his blog, and delete any comment that offended his snowflake sensibilities. I’ve dealt w/ dissembling, ham n’ egger barristers for 40 years. And believe it or not, some even more insipid than Edward Grass, Esq.

    2. “I hardly need to explain to you the many logic fallacies of this declaration.”

      Actually you do. It’s called argumentation. Identify the “logic fallacies”, explain why you believe they are so and then make your point on what the logical argument should be.

      1. Thanks, Olly, I am not your internet monkey.

        Pr. Turley knows what I am talking about and I hardly need to explain it to him.

        As for you, why don’t you read up on the anarchist movement, note that the large majority of protesters reportedly were peaceful, note that lack of academics reportedly involved, note the fact that the VAST majority of academics argue for free speech on campus and academic freedom, note that lack of any identification of the alleged academics who argue against people being allowed to speak on campuses, note the lack of any direct or indirect evidence of any connection between that unidentified small number of academics to the actions at issue and note the word “result” used by Pr. Turley to connect “academics” to a small number of violent protestors.

        Let me conclude this way. If I wrote that the white nationalist killer in Quebec was “the result of years” of Donald Trump and right wing radio you would understand the logical fallacy without me needing to explain.

        Mmmm-kay?

    3. Interesting how people like Edward find themselves into Taleb’s IYI category. The politicism of academics would be obvious to most anyone who monitored the news, to quite a low level of IQ. Yet here we have an intelligent person that is so blinded by cognitive dissonance that he is parsing out what he thinks are logic fallacies and completely misses the big picture.

      Unless the pendulum swings back, I for one fear that current and upcoming generations will be ruined by the current culture we have in the US and the abysmal brainwashing that they receive instead of true education (spoken of in terms of a general shift of course, there is always a distribution of inputs and outputs). I cannot imagine hiring any of these children that are processed into hypnotized acolytes of the Progressive Movement; the cost and risk of failure in retraining would not be worth the effort.

      1. Thank for saying I am smart, sort of? I follow the news quite closely. My father was an academic not long ago. I do recall Donald Trump demanding that his little snowflake Mike Pence be protected from free speech at the theater.

  10. Don’t forget John Reed. Seig me No Heils Comrade we no longer serve the party.

  11. For Berkeley, the shining example to the world in the sixties, to do this is truly hypocritical. The nation and the world changed for the better because people were supported by Berkeley and its residents when they spoke out against the Vietnam War and racial oppression. When protesters marched in New York and other cities they were attacked by construction workers wearing hard hats defending a backwards nation, or had dogs and water cannon set upon them. The elements that responded with that sort of force were America’s shame at the time. Now that shame is represented by the children and grandchildren of the very people who worked, suffered, and sometimes died for their rights.

    1. The students were already stirred up over the Muslim ban and Milo is known to be anti Islam The violence was unfortunate but Milo is just too toxic right now for a liberal university and especially so after the Muslim ban. He does like chaos like his boss, Bannon, and it might be better to ignore him and just let him speak. He would probably quickly fade into the sunset without all the negative attention.

      2. SMM/G,

        The violence is much more than unfortunate. It’s wrong. Call it what it is. Being upset isn’t a license to do this crap. These students should be effective protesters, not violent idiots.

        As I said further down, Trump is going fascist on UC Berkley. This is very disgusting. In order to oppose him we need people to sane up. No violence, no excusing violence as unfortunate. Be smart, be effective, be honest, have humor and cultivate the best inside of every person, not excuse their worst behavior.

      3. The right of protesting should never be confused with obstructing the right of protesting. Milo has the right of protesting. The students have the right of protesting Milo. However the students do not have the right of obstructing Milo’s protesting.

        That Milo may be a cancer on our society along with DDT and the rest of the vitriolic mess that is seeping out from under rocks and oozing into Washington is unfortunate. The way to deal with this is to allow the cancer to spread, identify it, separate it with focused protesting and humor. Both focused protesting and humor will reinforce some as to their perverse perspectives but it will isolate the cancer and draw to the cure more from that group which can actually think for themselves. Even Goldwater was rejected. To get rid of this cancer before it metastasizes further, we must be careful not to throw more fuel on the fire but focus surgically on the reasons why Milo and DDT should be TV stuff and how to get DDT back to where he belongs, on TV amusing some of the viewers. The vitriol and other disgusting stuff will follow him back to the talk shows and reality TV. So, let them express themselves. The more DDT expresses himself the more reason to get rid of him.

        1. “The way to deal with this is to allow the cancer to spread, identify it, separate it with focused protesting and humor. Both focused protesting and humor will reinforce some as to their perverse perspectives but it will isolate the cancer and draw to the cure more from that group which can actually think for themselves.”

          Issac,
          I could not give a more compelling reason to support your continued contributions on this blog.

          Nicely done!

  12. There will be more and more of this as the country Balkanizes. In the next liberal administration, there will be mainstream politicians calling for European/Canadian style hate speech laws in the US.

    All in the name of supporting diversity and multiculturalism.

    I thought diversity was supposed to bring love and brotherhood. What am I missing?

    1. You forgot to incude ‘realizing none of that propaganda lists the real goals of the fascit left war mongers.’ but that might be included in the last sentence.

    1. value for value Nick they aren’t worth much more if that.

      So the point system to pass any class without attending a single lecture.

      Five demonstrations with damage and injury = A
      Ten demonstrations with damage no injur7 = A
      Twenty demonstrations with no damage or injury = B
      Class attendance etc. = C.

      Using the English language or any language in a literate manner = D but forget that. California speak only has about eight words.

      Vote for any non Marxist Leninist International Socialist or any Fascist National Socialist. A with Magna Cum laude recommendationi.

      Torching an immigrants car A with Summa Cum Laude recommendation

      Attending class, lectures and passing tests? Records Stamped “Not College Level Material”

      1. Michael, Milo is flushing out the fascists. He is taking fire for the 1st Amendment. He came here because Europe does not recognize free speech.

  14. These Soros paid losers are simply helping Trump be a two term Prez. Notice how the loony leftists here can’t bring themselves to denounce w/o the usual caveat of “Trump..Bannon..Breitbart.” Trump won because the loony/angry left have taken over the Dem party and they are already helping to get him re-elected. .

    And JT, what a pipe dream to think Berkley will make this right.

    1. Thats’ because Carville is back from vacation and coordinating the daily programming.

  15. Thank Anon for providing the voice and the logic of a dictatorship. Free speech is a frightening and scary thing, isn’t it? If people don’t want to hear Mio speak, don’t go to his speech. It really is that simple. Why is it you who gets to decide who hears what?

      1. I forgot to add to my list UCB also has degrees in both Methods of Dictatorial Government Operations but then that’s at the Massa level. So now we can correct the list

        BA/BS for Bare Ass and Bull Shit
        MA for a major focused discipline as a Massa
        And PhD of course is Philophy and appliction of Socialist Fascdist DIctatorships

        White I’s go to the head of the line.

      2. So the logical response is to beat peaceful protesters, vandalize businesses and shut down free speech? What exactly was the threat? And what dictator made it?

        1. What peaceful protest. We did that on november 8th and prevailed. All I see now is abunch of fools and stupids showing their asses, spouting illiterate bull shit, burning cars of immigrants and getting us more votes. As valuable as that last part is I see no reason to pay for.

      3. If you describe Trump as a dictator, you lost the argument, but don’t let that stop you from helping vote in a Rep. Super Majority in 2018, as you do now.

        If you mean Trump should not withhold funds from U’s who disregard the law: Federal Law states that POTUS is REQUIRED to only forward Federal Funds to Us and other industries that enforce and uphold Federal Law. IOW, if POTUS sends funds to law breakers like Berkeley, he commits potential impeachable offense, a crime.

        If you think Berkeley upholds and enforces Federal Law, I have a bridge to sell.

  16. We at UCB love freedom to speak your position as long as it agrees with our liberal, socialist, marxist views.

  17. UC Berkeley offers one Major in Hate Speech and a bunch of minors in vandalism or something. Beyond the BS and BA level (bull shit and bare ass) the emphasis is on how conduct a violent activity and not get prosecuted under the rules of the Constitution OR that neat-o-rooney looney clooney set of charges “suspicion of terrorism or supporting terrorism’ which automatically cancels any and all civil rights.

    Since they aren’t careful what they ask for they should get it and hope it’s only a cut off of tax payer provided funds from decent people and not the provisions of the Obama improved system

    Personally this is one case where we may have to thank ObeyMe and the left especially the white identity secualar regressives for forgetting to cancel that curious part of the Patriot Act. As for the snowflakes…well…do you remember the name of the last fly you swatted?

  18. The only thing worse than putrid worldviews is stopping those ideas from being discussed freely.

  19. Milo represents Bannon to these students. Milo is an employee of Breitbart Inc. The violence should be condemned but who wants a Breitbart Bannon mouth piece on their campus. Apparently the diverse students at Berkeley do not. Trump threatened Berkeley on behalf of Bannon Inc.

    1. Apparently the students who invited him do, and they have a franchise to use public facilities like anyone else. The opposition can bring it its own bloody outside speakers.

      1. Thank you.

        Just to confirm: you personally condemn laws in Canada and seventeen EU nations wherein persons are incarcerated for disagreeing w/the Western-approved definition of the Judaic “Holocaust,” right?

    1. JT isn’t there a moderator for this kind of junk? After you purchase this I would also like to sell you interest in a gold mind located in the center of Newark, NJ.

Comments are closed.