Comments on: Labels, No Arguments and Banning – With Emma Kennedy

By: aljones909

aljones909 — Sun, 08 Jan 2017 12:05:38 +0000

Mitch Benn, a well known comedian on the radio, was vigorously promoting a boycott of the publishers of Milo’s book. I replied with the Chomsky quote:-
“Goebbels was in favor of free speech for views he liked. So was Stalin. If you’re really in favor of free speech, then you’re in favor of freedom of speech for precisely the views you despise. Otherwise, you’re not in favor of free speech.”

He didn’t get it. For some reason I was called a “snowflake” for merely suggesting that uncomfortable viewpoints should be published.

It’s depressing.

By: Gary

Gary — Wed, 04 Jan 2017 15:42:43 +0000

It’s quite adorable how many people have actually based their beliefs on things that they think are “just obvious”.

Have they heard of flat-earthers?

By: George Millo

George Millo — Wed, 04 Jan 2017 13:35:16 +0000

Surprised no-one else has mentioned this yet: why did she say that *men* who blog about being blocked on Twitter need to get a grip? Why only men specifically?

If she were male and had Tweeted “women who blog about getting blocked need to get a grip”, would it have gone unnoticed?

By: Tom S

Tom S — Mon, 02 Jan 2017 07:35:06 +0000

It actually took me a couple of minutes to appreciate the “labels” connotation in the cover illustration…I really like that. I’ve learned more from the spellchecker’s detailed blogs re: outrageous Twitter folly than anything else I can think of…actually part of the reason why I decided not to even subscribe to Twitter…this site represents free speech and rational thought and secular philanthropy so consistently, it’s why I subscribed to it four years ago.

By: Tom S

Tom S — Mon, 02 Jan 2017 07:16:32 +0000

I will continue to support him too. This person knows nothing about the spellchecker at all. What a superficial and totally fallacious remark to call him a professional troll. ??? He is a professional anti-troll.

By: jaxkayaker

jaxkayaker — Sat, 31 Dec 2016 19:30:35 +0000

Thanks for the clarification. Neither of those things was obvious, and the the latter still isn’t, but I take your meaning, that “cunting” that preceded your comments couldn’t stem from your followers, even if addressed to her.

By: Heather Hastie

Heather Hastie — Sat, 31 Dec 2016 19:09:45 +0000

You start of saying that “freedom of speech doesn’t equal freedom from reprisal” then say Stephen has no right of reply. Reprisal goes both ways mate. You’re writing rather a lot for someone who doesn’t think it’s a big deal too. It seems like you’re another one who only believes in freedom of speech for those you agree with.

Oh, and I’m not sure whether you’re referring to Stephen or me as your incoherent rant isn’t clear, but I don’t live in the UK, I live in NZ.

By: Stephen Knight

Stephen Knight — Sat, 31 Dec 2016 18:24:18 +0000

All those comments predated my tweets to her and her Milo comments. And appear to be describing others

By: jaxkayaker

jaxkayaker — Sat, 31 Dec 2016 18:20:05 +0000

Maybe I’m misunderstanding something, but it does appear from the twitter search image you posted that some individuals did call Emma Kennedy a cunt, though you said that hasn’t been happening. I’m not saying you did the name calling or requested it.

@F Pentali: Heather didn’t mention blocking at all. What are you on about?

By: Joe Vickers

Joe Vickers — Sat, 31 Dec 2016 15:06:14 +0000

I’m trying to be understanding of the mentality of people who have responded so poorly the way Emma Kennedy and others have. I understand the outrage at Milo and his ilk. He seems opportunistic and fans the fires of hatred in exchange for money and attention.

Obviously he’s too smart to say anything overtly racist even if he is. My hunch is that he has zero integrity but knows damn well the kind of people some of his shock tactics appeal to and precisely how to whip his haters into a frenzy. I think the correct response to his incessant trolling is to ignore him. I agree with you completely that the reaction has only bolstered book sales and played into his hands giving him more ammunition to criticise the left and whiney SJWs.

I think what people have a hard time grasping is the nuance between disliking what people like Milo stand for and the defence of freedom of speech and expression. I saw this furore unfold in real time today and yesterday and one of the repeated themes to their criticism of you seems to be asking (although hardly ever reasonably or politely), “Yeah but WHY defend Milo’s freedom of speech in particular right now?” I can understand that question when it’s not steeped in baseless assertions of bigotry.

Maybe embedding your defence of his freedom of speech in more specific criticism of him and why you’re not a fan would help get your point across clearer seeing as these people nearly always overlook the part where you say “I’m not a fan/Don’t like the guy”. Though I doubt it will help it is the tiniest display of understanding I can give for the baffling reaction to this. Charges of white supremacy and bigotry need to be backed up or not uttered. It’s disgusting and can potentially ruin lives if taken seriously. The emotive response is understandable but ill considered. Their hearts are in the right place but their heads are in the wrong place (up their own arse unfortunately).

Also as an aside, this is my first comment (I think). I’ve been listening to your podcasts and admiring your work and clarity of thought over the past two years or so. So thank you.