The 3-Step Argument the Left Makes to Justify Violence Against Conservative Speakers

The Daily Signal ^ | 08/15/2017 | Ben Shapiro

[ForYourChildren]

Free speech is under assault because of a three-step argument made by the advocates and justifiers of violence.

The first step is they say that the validity or invalidity of an argument can be judged solely by the ethnic, sexual, racial, or cultural identity of the person making the argument.

The second step is that they claim those who say otherwise are engaging in what they call “verbal violence,” and the final step is they conclude that physical violence is sometimes justified in order to stop such verbal violence.

So let’s examine each of these three steps in turn. First, the philosophy of intersectionality. This philosophy now dominates college campuses as well as a large segment, unfortunately, of today’s Democratic Party and suggests that straight, white Americans are inherently the beneficiaries of white privilege and therefore cannot speak on certain policies, since they have not experienced what it’s like to be black or Hispanic or gay or transgender or a woman.

This philosophy ranks the value of a view, not based on the logic or merit of the view, but on the level of victimization in American society experienced by the person espousing the view. Therefore, if you’re an LGBT black woman, your view of American society is automatically more valuable than that of a straight, white male.

The next step in the logic is obvious. If a straight, white male, or anybody else who ranks lower on the victimhood scale, says something contrary to the viewpoint of the higher-ranking, intersectionality identity, that person has engaged in a microaggression.

As NYU social psychologist Jonathan Haidt writes, “Microaggressions are small actions or word choices that seem on their face to have no malicious intent, but that are thought of as a kind of violence nonetheless.”

You don’t have to actively say anything insulting to microaggress. Somebody merely needs to take offense. If, for example, you say that society ought to be colorblind, you’re microaggressing certain identity groups who have been victimized by a noncolorblind society.

Note: Microaggressions, as the name suggests, are not merely insults. They are aggressions. They are the equivalent of physical violence.

{..snip..}

[Bodleian_Girl]

I’m sorry, I’m no help! I pretty much check Mike Cernovich several times a day to see what’s hopping.

[gaijin]

Same thing I do, thanks anyway..!

If I find out I will let you know, the Pol twitter summation page cuts out nearly all the nutty/pervvy stuff

(admittedly that’s most of it)

You end up with pretty solid content

[Bodleian_Girl]

I always clear my history after I visit Pol on 8 Chan and 4 Chan.

I’m thinking, “what if I die and people think I was looking on 8 Chan & 4 Chan for the wrong reasons!”

I check Reddit conspiracy off and on and of course The Donald.

[gaijin]

Kay it’s:

https://twitter.com/LeviSmithUSA/

Can you believe it..?

The mod went to UniteTheRight and while he was away they broke into his home and stole EVERYTHING.

He GPS tracked his GPS-tagged items to a local Public Housing Project:

The cops won’t help him.

[Bodleian_Girl]

Bookmarked!

So sad about his stuff!

[gaijin]

Scarier:

The FIRST time they robbed him they were 3.

Came back as a group of 6..!

That’s real brass, wow.

I guess he’s the only honky in that neighborhood, he said.

:(

Usually the site is simply a summation of the news, not personal stuff as you see now.

[TigersEye]

You forgot to ping Timpanagos1 and sargon to your post about them.

[MarkL]

Microaggressions, as the name suggests, are not merely insults. They are aggressions. They are the equivalent of physical violence.

Anyone who claims to be a victim of violence due to "microagressions" needs to be introduced to REAL physical violence to learn the difference between "perceived" violence and real, physical violence.

Mark

[MarkL]

Antifa is the rebirth of Nazi Germany!

The so called "Antifa" uses the exact same tactics of Hitler's "Brown Shirts," the SA, which used a combination of boycotts, forced exclusion, and violence to put down any thoughts or communication that they oppose.

Someone should share with them the history of the SA... And "The Night of Long Knives." History shows that any group that was key to the success of the revolution is eventually eliminated, since those in power know they were able to replace the rulers once, so why couldn't they do it again?

Mark