Objectively intelligent.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Can we all agree the sentiment of the letter is one to which any advanced society ought to aspire?

I'm not sure what "the sentiment of the letter" is, so let's be more concrete.

What Are You Fighting About?

Free speech defenders cast their argument as upholding first principles, but it’s not. A substantial majority of Americans agree that:

1) The government should not use state power to punish people for expressing their opinions, especially opinions about the government.
2) In general, influential private actors — employers, media outlets, universities, crowds, etc. — should not use their power to punish people for expression, whether or not they agree with the substance.
3) Some expressions are beyond the pale, and private actors should use their power to reduce the space in which those expressions are socially acceptable.

While both sides of this debate cast it in sweeping, sometimes civilizational terms, the entire thing takes place within point three: Which expressions should be beyond the pale, and how should private actors punish transgressions?

Is there anything here you disagree with?

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

So you're trying to censor my opinion, or eliminate my right to voice my concerns? What is happening to the culture here?

Say whatever shit you want, but I don't see why RT leaves you in charge of the Detroit Board. Think about it people - should we really have an anti-Fucker running a board?

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

It's all rather precious.

If we want to talk about free speech, I think we should start with state actions, not those of individuals exercising their own speech.

And frankly, I don't care if some editor loses their job because they do it poorly.

The only episode referenced in there that looks truly tragic is that of David Shor, and, what can you say, I'd never heard of his organization and I hope I never will again.

I think whatever the fuck is going on in Portland right now with Stephen Miller's militia is much more of a threat to free speech and democracy than people bitching on line and in newsrooms about each other.

[LessinSF]

Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan

I think whatever the fuck is going on in Portland right now with Stephen Miller's militia is much more of a threat to free speech and democracy than people bitching on line and in newsrooms about each other.

I am following this closely. I have family and a lot of friends in Oregon, and Portland in particular. But it should make (maybe one person, maybe) reconsider em's views on the Second Amendment. And, also, maybe reconsider one's view on "stand your ground" when presented by a bunch of guys in camoflage jumping out of an unmarked van.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan

I think whatever the fuck is going on in Portland right now with Stephen Miller's militia is much more of a threat to free speech and democracy than people bitching on line and in newsrooms about each other.

Agree completely. That's a real "oh shit" one. I'm hoping to get some insight from the Portland branch of the fam, though they're most busy these days with public health matters there.

I'm hoping we see a rapid investigation in the House, and in the Oregon state house.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Here's basically the only real victim of cancel culture the Harper's letter writers identified, and he has not been silenced. Indeed, he's getting more attention than before and seems to be doing fine, and giving one of the more substantively interesting articles: https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020...ory-polls.html

[Adder]

Originally Posted by LessinSF

I am following this closely. I have family and a lot of friends in Oregon, and Portland in particular. But it should make (maybe one person, maybe) reconsider em's views on the Second Amendment. And, also, maybe reconsider one's view on "stand your ground" when presented by a bunch of guys in camoflage jumping out of an unmarked van.

I'm curious why you think someone resisting those people with a gun gets out of the encounter alive.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by LessinSF

I am following this closely. I have family and a lot of friends in Oregon, and Portland in particular. But it should make (maybe one person, maybe) reconsider em's views on the Second Amendment. And, also, maybe reconsider one's view on "stand your ground" when presented by a bunch of guys in camoflage jumping out of an unmarked van.

Anyone who wants to use guns to fight police or military in the US with the goal of winning is absolutely lunatic.

[Oliver_Wendell_Ramone]

Originally Posted by LessinSF

I am following this closely. I have family and a lot of friends in Oregon, and Portland in particular. But it should make (maybe one person, maybe) reconsider em's views on the Second Amendment. And, also, maybe reconsider one's view on "stand your ground" when presented by a bunch of guys in camoflage jumping out of an unmarked van.

I don't have a great home office set-up, so I'm still going into the office most days. Downtown Portland is a weird place right now.

I'm not sure what the answer is to sometimes violent or destructive protesters. But unmarked/unbadged bodysnatchers sure as hell ain't it.

[LessinSF]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Anyone who wants to use guns to fight police or military in the US with the goal of winning is absolutely lunatic.

I'm so glad you have: (1) identified everyone who may jump out of an unmarked vehicle in camoflage without identification; and (2) made the decision for everyone else how they would like to respond to such a situation.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by LessinSF

I'm so glad you have: (1) identified everyone who may jump out of an unmarked vehicle in camoflage without identification; and (2) made the decision for everyone else how they would like to respond to such a situation.

Hey, good luck there.

Happy to support your defense if you choose to fight back, really, perfectly justified. I'm also willing contribute to burial costs.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by LessinSF

I am following this closely. I have family and a lot of friends in Oregon, and Portland in particular. But it should make (maybe one person, maybe) reconsider em's views on the Second Amendment. And, also, maybe reconsider one's view on "stand your ground" when presented by a bunch of guys in camoflage jumping out of an unmarked van.

I have followed this a little, not a lot. I've only seen one account from someone who was picked up this way. He was held for a brief period and then released without being charged, and then the federal authorities denied that he had been arrested (which may even be true in a super technical way that will not make sense to ordinary people who don't practice criminal law). I've got to admit that I have a very strong visceral reaction that there is something very wrong here. On the other hand, I don't see where it goes, because if federal agents pick you up, they have to (a) charge you with a federal crime, (b) hold you indefinitely without charging you, or (c) let you go. They can't do (a) if there's no federal charge, partly because federal judges are less likely to stand for this shit than state judges. They can't do (b) for the same reasons and also habeas. So, (c). And even doing (c) may run into federal judges before very long.

Not totally sure about what I've just said, so tell me why I'm wrong.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Here's basically the only real victim of cancel culture the Harper's letter writers identified, and he has not been silenced. Indeed, he's getting more attention than before and seems to be doing fine, and giving one of the more substantively interesting articles: https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020...ory-polls.html

He is totally brilliant. That is the most interesting thing I've read about politics in a while.

Also, makes me think that he was happy to leave that job because he didn't like what he was doing. This in particular:

Nothing that I tell people — or that my team [at Civis] told people — is actually that smart. You know, we’d do all this math, and some of it’s pretty cool, but at a high level, what we’re saying is: “You should put your money in cheap media markets in close states close to the election, and you should talk about popular issues, and not talk about unpopular issues.” And we’d use machine learning to operationalize that at scale.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Hey, good luck there.

Happy to support your defense if you choose to fight back, really, perfectly justified. I'm also willing contribute to burial costs.

I'm not sure what Less is saying, but if you are those feds, maybe you're choosing not to grab the people who look like they might start shooting. Open carry has a deterrent effect.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Here's where a good editor would have been useful:

An arrest was made early Friday in the brutal murder of 33-year-old tech entrepreneur Fahim Saleh, who was found dismembered in his Lower East Side condo this week. The suspect is Tyrese Devon Haspil, Saleh’s 21-year-old former personal assistant, who is expected to be charged with second-degree murder, among other crimes, according to the Times.

Several days after Saleh’s sister found his body, police are beginning to piece together the events that led to his killing....

New York Magazine