Free Speech for Me, but not for Thee

I’ll get back to the regular posts soon enough, but this case is just too good to pass up.

For those (somehow) unaware, Tyler Kissinger held a protest on May 30th, and is facing expulsion. The (failing) New York Times gave the following details:

  • He went in to Levi Hall without permission
  • He lied to security officers
  • He waited and let other unauthorized people in
  • He stormed the president’s office and staged a long-term sit-in

Of course, as someone who literally carries copies of the University of Chicago speech codes with me at all times, he did not comply with any of them. His behavior for sure disrupted the operations of the University. He also gained access to a building that he was not supposed to be in (why wold he wait and hide to let others in if that was not the case?). This is a private university. Any standard protections are gone. So, by all extents, he should be expelled. However, the “free speech activists” have come out of the woodwork to defend him.

This is a standard blatant leftist hypocrisy. If censorship or suppression of free speech goes to stop the violent and racist phrase “Trump 2016” or to shut down any other event, it’s perfectly fine! They’re all bigots! Yet, when a person breaks several rules in the name of a minimum wage, it is a problem. We should place contrived limits on freedom of speech, but when we literally break the actual limits of free speech, that’s perfectly great!

This thought process is incredibly dangerous. It is what leads to such things such as encouraging violence against Trump supporters and people saying that Black Lives Matter can’t lynch people (have we gone full regressive already?!). The “ends justify the means” mentality that is apparent here is despicable. You can’t be a half-activist of free speech. You can’t endorse free speech only when it helps your cause. Maybe I should denounce Trump and endorse Hillary. I can call anything I don’t like “hate speech”, and then commit literal crimes and be protected under the guise of progressiveness.

Bernie did endorse his behavior, but he’s just practicing endorsing criminals.

Why the DNC is screwed.

With Hillary’s indictment looming, the Democrats are in a pickle. Here is how things will most likely go down in every possible scenario.

Clinton is indicted, pardoned, and nominated: Complete disaster. Several FBI agents and other staff will resign. Obama will have his legacy tainted. Trump will be running against a literal criminal. It will be framed as if she wasn’t one, since she was not indicted (just like Bill Clinton is not considered impeached when he was not removed from office). Bernie supporters will all drop and never back her. Some of the Clinton voting block might stay home.

Bernie is nominated: Some of the Clinton camp will drop out and not support Bernie. Bernie is too far left for any reasonable person, and will alienate some of the Clinton block. He may revise some of his policies to be less socialist, but this will only alienate some of his voters. Trump destroys Bernie easily, regardless of polls. Just some reminders of Venezuela and that should be enough. It also depends who is VP. Elizabeth Warren is a death wish on any staff on the ticket.

Another candidate is nominated: The entire voting block is alienated due to feelings of disenfranchisement. Pathetically easily landslide for Trump. Biden is the safest option, but would have to make up for 1 year of lost time. Warren, again, is a death wish.

The Media is Sometimes Right (When They Agree With Me)

 In fact, however, the supporters of the welfare state are utterly anti-social and intolerant zealots. For their ideology tacitly implies that the government will exactly execute what they themselves deem right and beneficial. They entirely disregard the possibility that there could arise disagreement with regard to the question of what is right and expedient and what is not. 

– Ludwig von Mises

    Trump and Sanders are often two sides of the same coin. One labelled “fascist” and the other labelled “progressive”. This is not about their views, but mainly about their treatment by the media, and the public’s reaction to such claims. When the Washington post posted 16 anti-Sanders articles in under 16 hours, it demonstrates a very clear media bias. When anti-Trump article after anti-Trump article is posted, it’s certainly fine because clearly any sane individual would be against Trump (except for losers like Caitlyn Jenner).

    When Trump and his supporters get shut down, beat up, and silenced for supposed racism, this is an amazing act of progressive bravery. When Sanders was shut down by BlackLivesMatter for supposed racism, this was the clear result of overly entitled idealogues. When Trump is considered fascist for retweeting a Mussolini quote (because the first thing we do in school is memorize a list of Hitler, Stalin, and Mussolini quotes so we can avoid saying them. Also, authoritarian / fascist / nazi / communist leaders have to be great leaders. Otherwise, they would be shot) this is great evidence to not support Trump. When Sanders is implicated for sexism for defending himself against interruptions by Clinton, this only serves as a ridiculous, horribly incorrect outlook.

    When people call Sanders a socialist or a communist bent on infiltrating and destroying the country, this is just a dumb, extremist outlook on him. Nevermind that he is surely supported by some hardcore socialists. But when Trump is called a white supremacist, this is obviously a clear assessment of the facts. After all, he is supported by the Ku Klux Klan! Nevermind that the KKK has been irrelevant for years.

    One of the things that has really removed me from the left is this sort of minority fetishism. No woman, person of color, or hispanic can do any wrong. When a woman makes a false rape claim, it’s alright! She was just starting a conversation and probably ruined someone else’s life! But with Trump specifically, he is sometimes only labelled a racist because the media says so. His famous quote on immigrants uses the word some. Not all, not most, some. Yes, some illegal immigrants do bring crime, drugs, gun, and are rapists. Some. Yes, some immigrants use the system for their personal advantage, learn English, and send their kids to college. Why is it so xenophobic or racist to tell the truth? Some people abuse the system, some people use the system to their advantage. Why can’t we fix the system to keep the bad guys out and the hard workers in? I don’t think the wall is the best solution, but it sure is better than anyone else’s. Trump is not completely against immigration. He wants to reform the system to cut down on illegal immigration.