It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Conservatives that dare to speak in liberal areas are agitators

page: 3
18
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 15 2017 @ 11:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
Not much more to say. Just ask some of our left leaning ats members.

Ben Shapiro is an agitator for speaking a berkeley. No reason needed, the mere fact that he dares to have a conservative opinion proves he is just an agitator.

How tolerant!


If you KNOW you're going to stir up #, yes, you are an agitator.




posted on Sep, 15 2017 @ 11:42 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Sep, 15 2017 @ 11:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Dem0nc1eaner

This may be a huge shock to everyone but most liberals are not on board with the radical agenda. They are stuck same as conservatives with people who don't protect their interests and the media males it seem like it's unamous. All conservatives hate gays and liberals are all commies who hate america. Strangely I have many service members in my family who are liberal.

Maybe it's just real easy to rile up youth who's prefrontal cortex isn't developed.
edit on 15-9-2017 by luthier because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 15 2017 @ 11:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: Grambler
Not much more to say. Just ask some of our left leaning ats members.

Ben Shapiro is an agitator for speaking a berkeley. No reason needed, the mere fact that he dares to have a conservative opinion proves he is just an agitator.

How tolerant!


If you KNOW you're going to stir up #, yes, you are an agitator.


So, because you KNOW a campus is full of violent idiots, it's your own fault if you decide to speak there, rather than the violent idiots fault?



posted on Sep, 15 2017 @ 11:44 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

Under normal circumstances, I wouldn't consider Ben Shapiro to be an agitator. These aren't exactly normal circumstances in Berkeley though, are they? Why should we pretend that everything is black and white? That there's no such thing as an ulterior motive?

Do you honestly believe that Ben Shapiro didn't go to Berkeley in the hopes of provoking a reaction? He's unaware that Berkeley has become a battleground between factions of the far-right and far-left on the West Coast? That people are traveling from, in some cases hundreds of miles away, to represent their "side" in conflicts that many involved are hoping will boil over and become violent?

Ben Shapiro went to Berkeley (I'm sure by invitation of the Berkeley College Republicans) because it has become a focal point, because everyone is paying attention to what is going on in Berkeley, because everyone expects there to be conflict. Look at the thread that was created about it last night:

"Hurricane Ben Hits Berkeley"
"ANTIFA is there and we will see if they get mad."
"We shall also see if Shapiro get heckled and hooted out."

Ben Shapiro didn't go there simply to share his ideas or to try to persuade anyone with his opinions — he could have read nursery rhymes and it wouldn't have mattered — he went there because he knew it would be a "thing." Ben Shapiro has more of a platform to espouse his ideas than 99.999999% of Americans. He's got his own far-right propaganda site (The Daily Wire) and he's *constantly* on CNN (and I would imagine others). He went there for the same reason that protesters kept going into the "lion's den" at Donald Trump rallies where they were regularly assaulted, for the same reason that Infowars was paying people to show up at pro-Clinton rallies with "Bill Clinton is a rapist" signs, for the same reason that anti-Trump protesters were "bird dogging" Trump supporters, for the same reason that "conservative" speakers keep showing up at Berkeley every other month — to stir up controversy, to elicit reactions, etc.

Seems like even without any violence breaking out, he accomplished his purpose — you're talking about it right now. All he had to do was be Ben Shapiro, former Breitbart editor, and show up. So to your point about whether or not he's an agitator, I would argue that in this case, he certainly was. And he won't be the last. They'll keep showing up as long as it gets the reaction they want.

That said, so what? Just because he went there to be an agitator doesn't mean that violence would be an appropriate response. It's the wrong response legally, it's the wrong response socially, it's the wrong response philosophically and it's the wrong response in purely practical terms because it's giving the far-right what it wants — something to smear the other 99.99999999999999999% of Americans in the "Left" with in an attempt to keep pushing the Americans in the "Right" further to the right.



posted on Sep, 15 2017 @ 11:45 AM
link   
a reply to: intrepid

Was there an antifa protest going on for his old school consajerk stuff? I'm really just asking and lazy.



posted on Sep, 15 2017 @ 11:50 AM
link   
a reply to: PublicOpinion

They denied his first speech, then when they were publicly embarrassed by him chose a new venue, in which the students protested, blocked roads, and had to be removed by police for basically listening to something not that far from mitt Romney.

That is the issue. That people can't even tell the difference between Milo, Coulter, Shipiro, Rand Paul or Hitler.

Nothing wrong with criticizing the speaker or debating his views. In fact it's far more empowering to destroy an argument with logic.

Shapiro is willing to debate with logic instead of propaganda like Milo or even Anne Coulter, why would liberals be afraid of debating logical ideas?
edit on 15-9-2017 by luthier because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 15 2017 @ 11:51 AM
link   
But what would be the point in him speaking somewhere heavily conservative? People on ATS are constantly whining about the apparent "echo chamber", but in this instance Ben Shapiro should stay away from places where people might disagree with him? If he speaks in a heavily liberal area it's his fault if it kicks off because he should have just stayed in Idaho or something?

It sounds like your opinion is - the Berkeley College Republicans have invited a conservative speaker, for the sake of causing a stir; the only reason the speaker would attend is to cause a stir.

Isn't this just as (if not more) likely - the Berkeley College Republicans feel massively under represented and marginalised, because, y'know - Berkeley - and would like to do something about that.



posted on Sep, 15 2017 @ 11:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: PublicOpinion

Shapiro is willing to debate with logic instead of propaganda like Milo or even Anne Coulter, why would liberals be afraid of debating logical ideas?


Question, meet answer.



posted on Sep, 15 2017 @ 11:53 AM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

He has every right to do so and conducts himself in a civil manor.

It's a protest. People have done sit in and all kinds of things to be heard. His point unlIke some at right folks is actually the ideas. He wants them to be heard in a place that can't tolerate other ideas in hopes like say ghandi that people see how stupid violence is against nonviolent people.



posted on Sep, 15 2017 @ 11:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: Dem0nc1eaner

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: Grambler
Not much more to say. Just ask some of our left leaning ats members.

Ben Shapiro is an agitator for speaking a berkeley. No reason needed, the mere fact that he dares to have a conservative opinion proves he is just an agitator.

How tolerant!


If you KNOW you're going to stir up #, yes, you are an agitator.


So, because you KNOW a campus is full of violent idiots, it's your own fault if you decide to speak there, rather than the violent idiots fault?


A fire doesn't start itself. It needs a spark.



posted on Sep, 15 2017 @ 11:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: Dem0nc1eaner

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: Grambler
Not much more to say. Just ask some of our left leaning ats members.

Ben Shapiro is an agitator for speaking a berkeley. No reason needed, the mere fact that he dares to have a conservative opinion proves he is just an agitator.

How tolerant!


If you KNOW you're going to stir up #, yes, you are an agitator.


So, because you KNOW a campus is full of violent idiots, it's your own fault if you decide to speak there, rather than the violent idiots fault?


A fire doesn't start itself. It needs a spark.


Yup.

You think the spark is conflicting points of view?

Or is it actually a bunch of teenagers who can't control their emotions.



posted on Sep, 15 2017 @ 11:57 AM
link   
a reply to: intrepid

I don't mean to take it out of context but that is a dumb response. I guess blacks should never have created a spark either.

What is Shapiro about that is so disturbing to the far left?



posted on Sep, 15 2017 @ 11:59 AM
link   
a reply to: luthier




Shapiro is willing to debate with logic instead of propaganda


Sure.

But what exactly happened now to justify the whining? Anyone hurt, broken windows, burning cars? What am I? Where am I? Let's see what happens when BLM rolls up in the KKK headquarter to hold rallies and speeches. Will the people there react equally civilised? Maybe that's a good strawman for the collection, we already know the answer.
edit on 15-9-2017 by PublicOpinion because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 15 2017 @ 12:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: intrepid

I don't mean to take it out of context but that is a dumb response. I guess blacks should never have created a spark either.

What is Shapiro about that is so disturbing to the far left?


If you read the context it's not so "dumb". BTW, I'm talking in general. If you(anyone) KNOW you are going to inflame an area and do so anyway, you ARE an agitator. That is what the OP is about.



posted on Sep, 15 2017 @ 12:13 PM
link   
a reply to: PublicOpinion

The entire problem is this isn't like blm or the kkk

What is so inflammatory to the left that he says? He is an orthodox jew. Not a white supramicist.

The problem is people are so dumb they protest anything. The guy is basically a libertarian. It's like banning Rand Paul and having a riot over it.

The problem is these kids need to take a philosophy class seriously and learn how to debate and debate his ideas. He is willing to do so

I would take him up on it personally if I had more time. There are several religious arguments he makes that are based on identity politics for instance.



posted on Sep, 15 2017 @ 12:15 PM
link   
a reply to: intrepid

Not really if he isn't doing anything wrong.

Like I said sometimes it's necessary. This isn't a serious situation like MLK but it could get there if anytime someone disagrees with your politics you take it so personally you become violent.

So yeah as long as he is willing to take a beating for it. He is using nonviolent protest.



posted on Sep, 15 2017 @ 12:26 PM
link   
Sure seems a lot of people are scared by Ben Shapiro, wonder why? Surely they can debate him successfully.

Nah, it's easier to resort to other tactics. It is hard work to debate him. Ask Cenk.



posted on Sep, 15 2017 @ 12:31 PM
link   
a reply to: pavil

I am hoping for the Sam Harris, Ben debate. Will be a tough one.



posted on Sep, 15 2017 @ 12:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: Grambler
Not much more to say. Just ask some of our left leaning ats members.

Ben Shapiro is an agitator for speaking a berkeley. No reason needed, the mere fact that he dares to have a conservative opinion proves he is just an agitator.

How tolerant!


If you KNOW you're going to stir up #, yes, you are an agitator.


So the civil rights fighters that had sit ins in white only establishments were agitators?




top topics



 
18
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join