All about the alt-right (in the wake of anti-Muslim shooting) - Page 10

J2488 · #**181** 22.02.2017, 09:37

	Quote:	Blueangel
	I'll rephrase it for you... In light of recent information r.e. Milo's views, do you feel that the American Conservative Union have made the right decision in rescinding his invitation to speak at CPAC 2017?

	Quote:	Loz1983
	It's up to them who they invite or don't invite.

Thats not what Blueangel asked. Come now, Loz, dont leave us on a cliffhanger...

#**182** 22.02.2017, 10:11

	Quote:	J2488
	Thats not what Blueangel asked. Come now, Loz, dont leave us on a cliffhanger...

What do you want to hear?! Why should I have an opinion who a group, who I have no affiliation with or even idea of who they are, should choose to come and speak at their conference?

baboon · #**183** 22.02.2017, 10:31

I think the Amnesty annual report gives a nice view of where alt-right wants to take us

	Quote:
	more and more politicians call themselves anti-establishment and wield politics of demonization that hounds, scapegoats and dehumanizes entire groups of people to win the support of voters

We're seeing a return to a level of nationalism not seen since the 1930s. And we all know what that brought with it.

J2488 · #**184** 22.02.2017, 10:33

	Quote:	Blueangel
	I'll rephrase it for you... In light of recent information r.e. Milo's views, do you feel that the American Conservative Union have made the right decision in rescinding his invitation to speak at CPAC 2017?

	Quote:	Loz1983
	It's up to them who they invite or don't invite.

	Quote:	J2488
	Thats not what Blueangel asked. Come now, Loz, dont leave us on a cliffhanger...

	Quote:	Loz1983
	What do you want to hear?! Why should I have an opinion who a group, who I have no affiliation with or even idea of who they are, should choose to come and speak at their conference?

Again, not what was asked.

Answer the question, and stop trying to dodge it.

In light of recent information r.e. Milo's views, do you feel that the American Conservative Union have made the right decision in rescinding his invitation to speak at CPAC 2017?

Its a simple yes or no answer.

#**185** 22.02.2017, 10:52

	Quote:	J2488
	Again, not what was asked. Answer the question, and stop trying to dodge it. In light of recent information r.e. Milo's views, do you feel that the American Conservative Union have made the right decision in rescinding his invitation to speak at CPAC 2017? Its a simple yes or no answer.

If it were my conference then I wouldn't have rescinded the invitation based on the released recording.

But it's not my conference, it's the ACU's conference. Therefore it's entirely up to them.

Satisfied now?

J2488 · #**186** 22.02.2017, 11:27

So, no, the ACU should not have rescinded the invitation, because of Milo's beliefs and views regarding pedophilia.

In other words, you believe that with his views that a sexual relationship between a minor and an adult are not a problem, and despite the clear and real risk of the conservative movement being seen to be party to such views, he should still have been given a platform at a Conservative conference.

#**187** 22.02.2017, 11:41

	Quote:	J2488
	So, no, the ACU should not have rescinded the invitation, because of Milo's beliefs and views regarding pedophilia. In other words, you believe that with his views that a sexual relationship between a minor and an adult are not a problem, and despite the clear and real risk of the conservative movement being seen to be party to such views, he should still have been given a platform at a Conservative conference.

Ooooh, you were saving that up weren't you? Does it feel good to get if off your chest?

But to be clear, and not to have you misrepresent what I wrote:

The ACU are free to choose who they please to have speak at their conference.
I believe what you are saying are "his views" are not his views, he clarified this yesterday.
I don't believe "his views" are a problem based on what he would have been talking about at the conference.

J2488 · #**188** 22.02.2017, 11:51

He could have been leading a 4 hour discussion on the impact of the teletubbies on municipal architecture, but it still doesn't get away from the fact that you believe that a man who views paedophilia as an acceptable construct, should be associated with the Conservative movement.

You suggest he should be welcomed and celebrated by the Conservative movement in spite of his views on statutory rape and paedophilia.

I'm not sure you know what 'Conservative' actually means.

#**189** 22.02.2017, 12:00

	Quote:	J2488
	He could have been leading a 4 hour discussion on the impact of the teletubbies on municipal architecture, but it still doesn't get away from the fact that you believe that a man who views paedophilia as an acceptable construct, should be associated with the Conservative movement. You suggest he should be welcomed and celebrated by the Conservative movement in spite of his views on statutory rape and paedophilia. I'm not sure you know what 'Conservative' actually means.

He has clarified yesterday in great detail what his views are.

Roman Polanski is a convicted paedophile. He won an Oscar in 2003. Does that mean the Oscars are associated with paedophiles? Does that mean the Oscars celebrate paedophiles? Does that mean the Oscars view paedophilia as an acceptable construct?

Take your time.

J2488 · #**190** 22.02.2017, 12:53

	Quote:	Loz1983
	He has clarified yesterday in great detail what his views are. Roman Polanski is a convicted paedophile. He won an Oscar in 2003. Does that mean the Oscars are associated with paedophiles? Does that mean the Oscars celebrate paedophiles? Does that mean the Oscars view paedophilia as an acceptable construct? Take your time.

It means the Oscars are associated with a man who is a convicted pedophile, yes.

Lets ignore the fact that The Oscars and the American Conservative Union are two very different beasts you're trying to conflate, in order to maintain an increasingly precarious point. One is based on artistic merit, the other on political beliefs but hey ho.

Now, back to the matter at hand:

You believe Milo should be welcomed and celebrated by the Conservative movement in spite of his views on statutory rape and pedophilia. You, personally, see no conflict in a conservative movement endorsing a man with contradicting views regarding sex with children.

Stop pussyfooting around it and declare it.

Didn't really take long, that.

#**191** 22.02.2017, 13:25

	Quote:	J2488
	So, no, the ACU should not have rescinded the invitation, because of Milo's beliefs and views regarding pedophilia.

	Quote:	J2488
	You suggest he should be welcomed and celebrated by the Conservative movement in spite of his views on statutory rape and paedophilia.

Milo's view on pedophilia is being lied about.

As for whether or not he should have been invited in the first place, an error here is that Milo is not really the same kind of conservative as CPAC. He admits this himself. If anything, Milo is mainly a Libertarian.

I'm not sure Milo was an appropriate keynote speaker for CPAC in the first place. They wanted to give a nod to him, as he has accompllished to reveal a large segment of conservativism that was previously overlooked. He revealed that conservatism is not confined to a racist stereotype. He revealed that Conservatism encompassed all race, genders, religions and sexual preference.

The next upcoming generation, Generation Z, appears to be more conservative than any of the other previous generations. It is this group that needs to be recognized and acknowledged, not Milo himself.

J2488 · #**192** 22.02.2017, 13:30

	Quote:	Phos
	Milo's view on pedophilia is being lied about. As for whether or not he should have been invited in the first place, an error here is that Milo is not really the same kind of conservative as CPAC. He admits this himself. If anything, Milo is mainly a Libertarian. I'm not sure Milo was an appropriate keynote speaker for CPAC in the first place. They wanted to give a nod to him, as he has accompllished to reveal a large segment of conservativism that was previously overlooked. He revealed that conservatism is not confined to a racist stereotype. He revealed that Conservatism encompassed all race, genders, religions and sexual preference. The next upcoming generation, Generation Z, appears to be more conservative than any of the other previous generations. It is this group that needs to be recognized and acknowledged, not Milo himself.

As may be the case, but the question posed was not one of conservatism brand, but of the righteousness of disinviting the guy to the ACU conference.

#**193** 22.02.2017, 13:39

	Quote:	J2488
	As may be the case, but the question posed was not one of conservatism brand, but of the righteousness of disinviting the guy to the ACU conference.

He's become a liability to the brand. Libertarianism is definitely a value CPAC would like to uphold. Milo's right to say whatever he wants should be upheld, so long as he is held accountable to it. This is Milo being held accountable for the content of what he said.

Its fine to disinvite him, as he doesn't really represent anybody, let alone Conservatism. I'm not so sure Milo has really represented Conservatism at any time, rather he simply railed against Liberal hipocrisy and censorship of free speech. Its only one issue in the whole gamut of things.

#**194** 22.02.2017, 14:01

	Quote:	J2488
	It means the Oscars are associated with a man who is a convicted pedophile, yes. Lets ignore the fact that The Oscars and the American Conservative Union are two very different beasts you're trying to conflate, in order to maintain an increasingly precarious point. One is based on artistic merit, the other on political beliefs but hey ho. Now, back to the matter at hand: You believe Milo should be welcomed and celebrated by the Conservative movement in spite of his views on statutory rape and pedophilia. You, personally, see no conflict in a conservative movement endorsing a man with contradicting views regarding sex with children. Stop pussyfooting around it and declare it. Didn't really take long, that.

So it's okay to endorse paedophiles as long as it's based on "artistic merit". Glad we sorted that out.

Many American Conservatives are anti-gay. Many American Conservatives have very, well, conservative views regarding sexual liberation, religion, legal drinking age etc. etc. So all things considered, Milo wasn't probably a good choice of speaker for them.

J2488 · #**195** 22.02.2017, 14:02

Thanks Phos, a straight answer. Appreciate it.

Now then Loz...

You believe Milo should be welcomed and celebrated by the Conservative movement in spite of his views on statutory rape and pedophilia. You, personally, see no conflict in a conservative movement endorsing a man with contradicting views regarding sex with children.

Just endorse the above with a simple 'yes, i agree' and we can all move on.

Thanks in advance.

Blueangel · #**196** 22.02.2017, 14:03

	Quote:	J2488
	As may be the case, but the question posed was not one of conservatism brand, but of the righteousness of disinviting the guy to the ACU conference.

Precisely, and that's the only question I wanted an answer to. Either both Berkeley and the American Conservative Union are right in rescinding Milo's invitation to speak, or they are both wrong. You can't have this decision both ways.

From CPAC's point of view, they became uncomfortable with the thought of Milo sharing a platform with the POTUS who is also speaking at this event, and rightly so. From what I've read, many of the organisers were always uncomfortable with this, but the latest revelations were the final straw. Wonder if Milo is the alt-right's Ernst Röhm and he's been thrown under the bus...

From The New Statesman...

	Quote:
	The strangest part of yesterday was seeing Milo Yiannopoulous's increasingly sincere Facebook posts, as the awful realisation dawned on him - as it dawned on Nigel Farage during the referendum - that the sweet shelter of the mainstream right was being withdrawn from him. When he had attacked his female peers in the London tech scene, when he attacked transgender people for being "mentally ill", when he attacked an actor for the temerity to be black, female and funny in a jumpsuit, he was given licence. He was provocative, starting a debate, exercising his free speech. But yesterday he found out that there is always a line. For the right, it's child abuse - because children, uniquely among people who might be sexually abused, are deemed to be innocent. No one is going to buy that a 13-year-old shouldn't have been out that late, or wearing that, or brought it on himself.

http://www.newstatesman.com/2017/02/...populist-right

J2488 · #**197** 22.02.2017, 14:04

	Quote:	Loz1983
	So it's okay to endorse paedophiles as long as it's based on "artistic merit". Glad we sorted that out. Many American Conservatives are anti-gay. Many American Conservatives have very, well, conservative views regarding sexual liberation, religion, legal drinking age etc. etc. So all things considered, Milo wasn't probably a good choice of speaker for them.

No it isn't ok to endorse them on artistic merit, but no one in this conversation said it was.

And regardless of Milo being a good choice or a bad choice (something Phos has already covered) i bring your attention back to the previous post.

#**198** 22.02.2017, 14:18

	Quote:	Loz1983
	So it's okay to endorse paedophiles as long as it's based on "artistic merit". Glad we sorted that out. Many American Conservatives are anti-gay. Many American Conservatives have very, well, conservative views regarding sexual liberation, religion, legal drinking age etc. etc. So all things considered, Milo wasn't probably a good choice of speaker for them.

This is unfortunate, because Milo did represent a social breakthrough of sorts. Contrary to how the opposition frame it, Conservatism extends to gays, minorities, muslims, etc. Conservatism has little to do with classicism.

There was a missed opportunity here. Generation Z needs to be reached.

As for Milo, he did not condone pedophilia. He basically got ahead of himself in intellectualizing pedastry in a recorded conversation, then was cut-edited out of context.

J2488 · #**199** 22.02.2017, 14:26

	Quote:	Phos
	This is unfortunate, because Milo did represent a social breakthrough of sorts. Contrary to how the opposition frame it, Conservatism extends to gays, minorities, muslims, etc. Conservatism has little to do with classicism. There was a missed opportunity here. Generation Z needs to be reached. As for Milo, he did not condone pedophilia. He basically got ahead of himself in intellectualizing pedastry in a recorded conversation, then was cut-edited out of context.

Thats the most convoluted explanation yet.

#**200** 22.02.2017, 14:29

	Quote:	J2488
	Thats the most convoluted explanation yet.

Have you actually paid attention to what he has said?