The question was why you asked. Is something puzzling you about how, why, where, and by whom they are "associated" with "liberals"? The voting rights act is directly at issue right now - good indications that failure to enforce its provisions swung the most recent Presidential election, as well as loading Congress with white bigots over the past few cycles. By the remaining Congressmen.
Civil disobedience over some troll speaking, is a waste of time, makes liberals look bad and is antithetical to any progress. You people comparing this to the glory of civil rights struggle is gross, telling people to shut up is the opposite of civil rights, demanding freedoms be restricted instead of extended. With that attitude we are going to be under republican/alt-right rule for a very long time. Where and when will it stop? https://archive.is/OuAxh "So how's that for goal-post shifting? First, we decide it's okay to attack Nazis. Then we decide it's okay to punch people who aren't Nazis but are awful and sort of remind us of Nazis. Then it becomes okay to punch the people who say Nazis and Milo are bad but we shouldn't punch them. You know those slippery-slope arguments people are always rolling their eyes at? Well, there's the slippery slope for you. And we'll be normalizing a whole lot of violence as we slide. Meanwhile, the shut down of Yiannopoulos at Berkeley was so wildly successful that conservative students have been cowed into silence. Just kidding: They're actually bringing Milo back to campus, and Alex Jones." THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU GIVE TROLLS ANY ATTENTION!
It means young people refuse to tolerate the alt-right ideology. An important message at a time when the alt-right leader, Bannon, is one of the most powerful men in the world right now. No. Right is creating a left wing tea party movement. But without the racism.
And so? Smashing shit up is not going to win us more votes! Give the Trolls the attention they want is actually going to win THEIR SIDE votes! They are proclaiming left as dangerous and against freedom and now they can couple that with video of antifa and rioters destroying stuff, this is a propaganda loss for the left and you don't think for a instant that propaganda minster Bannon does not know that and will use this against us? 1: Even without the racism the tea party was not a good thing. 2: A group that believes it is Ok to attack people based on race is racist, don't you agree? 3: I'm not seeing this result in sane political activism, unless this results in the election of democrats with smart effective policies, I don't see this ending well. The tea party is right at this moment demanding the republicans wipe out obamacare as fast a possible regardless of the damage, these people are completely incapable of reason, WE CAN'T BECOME THE SAME! I'm all for learning from the tea party's success, but whole sale emulation is disastrous. The tea party democrats would elect Kanye West in 2020!
No, I don't. Many things did. If not for the riots and (more importantly) the civil disobedience, civil rights would not have advanced as fast.
Excellent so then we should not associate with them. I disagree, if it had not been for the violence it would have advanced faster. But we are arguing different points, civil disobedience is not violence.
You just said "Civil disobedience over some troll speaking, is a waste of time, makes liberals look bad and is antithetical to any progress." If you want to separate those two, fine with me - but you probably shouldn't discuss them in the same thread then. I also disagree that violence is always bad. Violence opposing the KKK in the 1950's and 1960's was, in my morality, justified - even if one had to go to jail over it. They were systematically killing people and terrorizing communities. Nowadays, when people use the term "nazi" or "fascist" they are usually referring to some guy living in his mom's basement who has his own blog. Violence towards such a person is NOT justified, because the harm he does is proportionally less. Civil disobedience in opposing the US government's policies in the 1950's was justified as well - even if one had to go to jail over it. Indeed, Rosa Parks did more for the civil rights movement than a thousand impassioned speeches ever did.
I should have put "civil disobedience" in quotes, I was mocking your use of it for burning down buildings and attacking people with knives and bats and 2x2, etc I don't care about your interpretation of Civil Rights, back to the now, the present, trying to shut up a troll is not a civil rights issue.
Bannon's employment of propaganda has never been limited by, or essentially based on, reality. Would you have shut down the voter registration drives of Acorn, because Bannon could use them against "us"? Because that's what happened - Acorn was shut down because it was a propaganda liability. And so a lot of black people did not get registered to vote. How'd that work out? Regardless of how one views the college student disorders and - associated, by somebody - property destructions at that one Southern California school, they can't be very high on a list of what to put a lot of effort into opposing. The Dems have much bigger problems than that, even if they could do something about it - which they can't.
