Its been an OK news week for us smug snowflakes and libtards who are so high-minded about things like facts, peer review, government accountability, intelligence briefings and so on. National Security Advisor Michael Flynn resigned, Senator Tom Cotton got grilled at a town hall, and some come around finally went around and caught an alt-right leading spokesman in a comment praising priest pedophilia.

This spokesman, Milo Yiannopoulos, isnt new to controversy. Hes made his career on it. Yiannopoulos is the token minority of the alt-right: a gay British immigrant who calls himself a Dangerous Faggot and dresses like a living debunker of the stereotype about fashionable gays. As a Breitbart editor, he wrote articles like 10 Things Milo Hates About Islam, Heres Why There Ought to be a Cap on Women Studying Science and Maths and other posts denying the existence of racism, sexism and social injustice. He got banned from tweeting for targeting actress Leslie Jones with a series of tweets steeped in racial tropes about black women.

So at the beginning of February, students at University of California Berkeley who were offended by his views, took to the streets where Yiannopoulos was supposed to speak. They protested and rioted, and the speech was canceled. Yiannopoulos and other conservatives claimed that this was an infringement on his free speech. Yiannopoulos and his allies claimed that his speech could not be limited, even by the expressions of others who were offended.

Until this week that is. A video surfaced showing Yiannopoulos clearly appearing to support sex between 13-year-old boys and grown men, including Yiannopoulos saying that he wouldnt give nearly such good head if it wasnt for him (Father Michael). Suddenly, all of those free-speech advocates willing to defend him for offensive comments disappeared like the Arctic ice shelf.

The unwillingness of these advocates to speak sooner is a little hypocritical, but I think that it shows that there is a line where free speech becomes something else. There are limits on speech in the law already; you cant falsely yell fire in a crowded room. Its a hard line to draw, but when someone is harmed by speech or the acts it implies, that speech isnt warranted.

With comments about pedophilia, its really clear why its harmful. With other statements about race, gender and so on, its less obvious but statements like those made by Yiannopoulos which target minorities question the value of minority participation in society. Those statements downplay some peoples desires to make choices or speak which is inherently harmful and dehumanizing.

Its okay to speak out against a speaker is repeatedly irrational and resistant to facts it is a hasty generalization to draw conclusions from someones gender, race, sex and religion since these things individually tell very little about a person.

Just because someone has a right to speech doesnt mean they have a right to a venue, so its justified to protest a speech by someone whos unduly offensive. And if the speech is harmful, like Yiannopoulos pedophile comments, and repeatedly false or inaccurate, like his other comments, it is fine to limit it. Its a shame it took Yiannopoulos free-speech allies so long to realize that the line had been crossed.

Original post:

Milo and the Limits of Free Speech - The Arkanas Traveller