No safe space for Lars Ulrich at UC Berkeley

madoka

Diamond Member
Jun 22, 2004
4,344
712
121
I hope you libtards are happy about the little freedom-hating monsters you're creating on college campuses.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...k-and-destroy-lars-ulrich-at-uc-berkeley.html

It was a sad day for the First Amendment at the University of California, Berkeley: militant far-left students stormed the stage during a recent forum featuring Metallica drummer Lars Ulrich, fully intent on halting the event. Their actions—which included an alleged assault of one of the other speakers—are not merely a betrayal, but a repudiation of the values of the university that birthed the Free Speech Movement in the 1960s.

In an election season when U.S. political discourse has been profoundly damaged by an increasing contempt for free speech—both among the liberal hecklers who disrupt Donald Trump events, and among Trump’s own supporters and campaign staffers, who respond with violence—it’s more important than ever for universities to serve as bastions of tolerance and free expression. But if the episode at Berkeley is any evidence, universities have become breeding grounds for the illiberal values now permeating American society.

The Berkeley episode involved the Student Labor Committee, a group of liberal students who believe that the university administration treats its contract workers poorly. The group has demanded better wages for these employees and is urging prospective speakers to boycott the university until the administration caves.

Whether or not the students are right about employee compensation, they have every right to press the university for better treatment. They also have the right to boycott events, and to urge others—including the planned speakers for these events—to do the same. This is the very essence of political action.

But calling for boycotts and enacting actual censorship are very different things—especially when violence is used. Which brings us to the Ulrich event.

Ulrich, who is known for holding quasi-libertarian views, was hosting a forum on campus to “celebrate the creative culture of the Bay Area,” according to the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education. Ulrich was joined on stage at different times by other notable people, including Salesforce.com founder Marc Benioff, Ulrich’s own father, and others.

Well aware that aggrieved students did not want the event to proceed, Ulrich began the event by inviting them to speak. One did so. The event then continued.

But the activists were still intent on derailing the event, and eventually they stormed the stage. Their goal was to enact the heckler’s veto by making the event too unsafe to continue. To that end, one student actually attacked Benioff, according to an op-ed in The Daily Californian that described the incident as “a shocking, vicious spasm, which fortunately did not result in any injuries—after which the show went on (as it must).” This student’s attempt to wrestle the microphone away from Benioff was captured on video.

Campus police were on hand, and intervened in time to prevent anyone from being hurt. Thankfully, the students did not succeed in their effort to derail the proceedings. But the mere fact that they tried—that they believe in violence and the heckler’s veto—is a serious indictment of their movement.

The incident would be worrisome enough if it were merely an isolated incident. Unfortunately, the University of California system is rife with examples of illiberal students refusing to let anyone else discuss ideas that they don’t want to hear. Recently, at the University of California-Davis, pro-choice protesters disrupted a pro-life demonstration by confiscating their flyers and throwing them on the ground. The perpetrator was caught on camera and was approached by police, but escaped without punishment.

Far too often, the universities themselves deserves blame for either humoring students’ censorious delusions or taking matters into their own hands. At another California university, California State University of Los Angeles, administrators told conservative students that they couldn’t bring right-wing pundit Ben Shapiro to campus unless they balanced out his perspective by also including a liberal voice. This is, of course, nonsense.

The administration eventually relented and allowed the event to proceed—at which point, crazy students took up the effort to violate Shapiro’s First Amendment rights at all costs. Protesters mobbed the event—injuring some spectators—and even pulled the fire alarm multiple times in an effort to shut it down.
 

1sikbITCH

Diamond Member
Jan 3, 2001
4,194
574
126
Cart before the horse. Berkeley is Mecca for us libtards and has been churning out libtards since the 60's and many libtards today are direct or indirect descendants of Berkeley libtards.

It's like saying WTF there are a lot of Mormons in Utah.



Berkeley: fighting the Republican jackboots since 1964.


FreeSpeech2.png
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
35,341
28,615
136
ROFL at the characterization of trying to take someone's microphone as "attacking Benioff." The kid ran up and tried to take the microphone. The only "violence" I saw was when he was hurled to the floor. I bet the OP cries about how the world is becoming too PC as well. Hilarious.
 

DougK62

Diamond Member
Mar 28, 2001
8,035
6
81
The folks writing that article clearly do not understand the first ammendment.
 

thraashman

Lifer
Apr 10, 2000
11,072
1,476
126
The folks writing that article clearly do not understand the first ammendment.

Exactly. And the article even says that they failed to disrupt the event. Lars even handled it correctly in letting a speaker come up beforehand. Now I say they are more than welcome to try to heckle, when they stormed the stage their removal was the right call.

And if you're (the OP and other conservatives) going to try to associate their behavior with every liberal, fine. Then Trump supporters violent and racist behavior is how all conservatives act. I think I'd rather be associated with the disruptive liberal students than the less than civilized human behavior of Trump supporters.
 
Nov 29, 2006
15,606
4,055
136
lol college kids are so stupid. Was he complaining about 40k/year tuition and $9/hour jobs? He does know he doesnt HAVE to go to college, right?
 

OrByte

Diamond Member
Jul 21, 2000
9,302
144
106
F you to the authors of this stupid article and to the OP

you clearly have no understanding of the 1st amendment, this is just lazy faux-outrage.

Berkeley has been doing this sort of thing well before you were suckling with a wet diaper OP.

Berkeley will continue to be outrageously librul. so enjoy your cup o righteous outrage OP!!! you wear it well :)
 

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
16,188
14,092
136
ROFL at the characterization of trying to take someone's microphone as "attacking Benioff." The kid ran up and tried to take the microphone. The only "violence" I saw was when he was hurled to the floor. I bet the OP cries about how the world is becoming too PC as well. Hilarious.

Yeah, Reason mag has played this incidence up as violence in a few different articles. I don't see anything particularly violent about trying to grab a mic. Granted, it is censorious in principle. But not really "violent."
 

Indus

Diamond Member
May 11, 2002
9,949
6,535
136
Kirk Hammet is a god. Jason Newstead is pretty cool. Lars and James are douchebags.
 

OutHouse

Lifer
Jun 5, 2000
36,413
616
126
militant far-left students stormed the stage during a recent forum featuring Metallica drummer Lars Ulrich, fully intent on halting the event. Their actions—which included an alleged assault of one of the other speakers

oxford-student-union.jpg
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
Except for the fact that the Nazi party is universally agreed upon by historians to have been extreme far right wing.
Um, no. The National Socialist German Workers Party is universally agreed upon by PROGRESSIVES to have been extreme far right wing. You know, by the same people who insist that there is no right to speech they dislike. More reasonable people recognize that the National Socialist German Workers Party, while starting as a left wing party competing with the German Communists, had elements common to both left wing and right wing parties both in Germany and in other nations, as well as recognizing that in the end its evil far outweighs its politics.
 

brycejones

Lifer
Oct 18, 2005
26,156
24,087
136
Um, no. The National Socialist German Workers Party is universally agreed upon by PROGRESSIVES to have been extreme far right wing. You know, by the same people who insist that there is no right to speech they dislike. More reasonable people recognize that the National Socialist German Workers Party, while starting as a left wing party competing with the German Communists, had elements common to both left wing and right wing parties both in Germany and in other nations, as well as recognizing that in the end its evil far outweighs its politics.

NTFSA!
Facisim is right wing. The Nazis were facists.
 

Bart*Simpson

Senior member
Jul 21, 2015
604
4
36
www.canadaka.net
The folks writing that article clearly do not understand the first ammendment.

'First Amendment'. It is a proper noun so capitalize both words in the name. Just trying to be helpful. :thumbsup:

That said, the First Amendment prohibits your right to interrupt someone else's private event under the clause of 'Freedom of Assembly'.

And you cannot be free to assemble if some petulant little shitstain is free to shut down or disrupt your assembly.
 

MajinCry

Platinum Member
Jul 28, 2015
2,495
571
136
Recently, at the University of California-Davis, pro-choice protesters disrupted a pro-life demonstration by confiscating their flyers and throwing them on the ground. The perpetrator was caught on camera and was approached by police, but escaped without punishment.

I'm okay with that.
 

Bart*Simpson

Senior member
Jul 21, 2015
604
4
36
www.canadaka.net
NTFSA!
Facisim is right wing. The Nazis were facists.

Fascism is based upon dirigisme which is an aspect of socialism.

The difference being is that in socialism the government heavily taxes industry while industry has some freedom to produce what it wants.

Dirigisme is when the government directs private industry what to produce and then private industry is still heavily taxed.

On the political spectrum the fascism of Italy and Germany were between the socialism of Britain and France and the authoritarian communism of the USSR.

Libertarianism is on the right-wing and, curiously, pure Anarchism is the true extreme right wing as it advocates pure individual sovereignty ('Sovereign Citizens' come to mind?) and a total absence of government.
 

1sikbITCH

Diamond Member
Jan 3, 2001
4,194
574
126
Only idiots go to Berkeley. In goes the hamburger and out comes the Progies.

See even Moonbeam knows this shit.

On a side note, the OP opines that college campuses produce liberals. Where do the Republicans come from?
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
<sigh>

For those not too vapid or too entrenched in partisan ignorance to learn, I offer the twenty five points of the National Socialist German Workers Party. Note that these are available in many, many places.

1. We demand the union of all Germans in a Great Germany on the basis of the principle of self-determination of all peoples.

2. We demand that the German people have rights equal to those of other nations; and that the Peace Treaties of Versailles and St. Germain shall be abrogated.

3. We demand land and territory (colonies) for the maintenance of our people and the settlement of our surplus population.

4. Only those who are our fellow countrymen can become citizens. Only those who have German blood, regardless of creed, can be our countrymen. Hence no Jew can be a countryman.

5. Those who are not citizens must live in Germany as foreigners and must be subject to the law of aliens.

6. The right to choose the government and determine the laws of the State shall belong only to citizens. We therefore demand that no public office, of whatever nature, whether in the central government, the province, or the municipality, shall be held by anyone who is not a citizen.

We wage war against the corrupt parliamentary administration whereby men are appointed to posts by favor of the party without regard to character and fitness.

7. We demand that the State shall above all undertake to ensure that every citizen shall have the possibility of living decently and earning a livelihood. If it should not be possible to feed the whole population, then aliens (non-citizens) must be expelled from the Reich.

8. Any further immigration of non-Germans must be prevented. We demand that all non-Germans who have entered Germany since August 2, 1914, shall be compelled to leave the Reich immediately.

9. All citizens must possess equal rights and duties.

10. The first duty of every citizen must be to work mentally or physically. No individual shall do any work that offends against the interest of the community to the benefit of all.

Therefore we demand:

11. That all unearned income, and all income that does not arise from work, be abolished.

12. Since every war imposes on the people fearful sacrifices in blood and treasure, all personal profit arising from the war must be regarded as treason to the people. We therefore demand the total confiscation of all war profits.

13. We demand the nationalization of all trusts.

14. We demand profit-sharing in large industries.

15. We demand a generous increase in old-age pensions.

16. We demand the creation and maintenance of a sound middle-class, the immediate communalization of large stores which will be rented cheaply to small tradespeople, and the strongest consideration must be given to ensure that small traders shall deliver the supplies needed by the State, the provinces and municipalities.

17. We demand an agrarian reform in accordance with our national requirements, and the enactment of a law to expropriate the owners without compensation of any land needed for the common purpose. The abolition of ground rents, and the prohibition of all speculation in land.

18. We demand that ruthless war be waged against those who work to the injury of the common welfare. Traitors, usurers, profiteers, etc., are to be punished with death, regardless of creed or race.

19. We demand that Roman law, which serves a materialist ordering of the world, be replaced by German common law.

20. In order to make it possible for every capable and industrious German to obtain higher education, and thus the opportunity to reach into positions of leadership, the State must assume the responsibility of organizing thoroughly the entire cultural system of the people. The curricula of all educational establishments shall be adapted to practical life. The conception of the State Idea (science of citizenship) must be taught in the schools from the very beginning. We demand that specially talented children of poor parents, whatever their station or occupation, be educated at the expense of the State.

21. The State has the duty to help raise the standard of national health by providing maternity welfare centers, by prohibiting juvenile labor, by increasing physical fitness through the introduction of compulsory games and gymnastics, and by the greatest possible encouragement of associations concerned with the physical education of the young.

22. We demand the abolition of the regular army and the creation of a national (folk) army.

23. We demand that there be a legal campaign against those who propagate deliberate political lies and disseminate them through the press. In order to make possible the creation of a German press, we demand:

(a) All editors and their assistants on newspapers published in the German language shall be German citizens.

(b) Non-German newspapers shall only be published with the express permission of the State. They must not be published in the German language.

(c) All financial interests in or in any way affecting German newspapers shall be forbidden to non-Germans by law, and we demand that the punishment for transgressing this law be the immediate suppression of the newspaper and the expulsion of the non-Germans from the Reich.

Newspapers transgressing against the common welfare shall be suppressed. We demand legal action against those tendencies in art and literature that have a disruptive influence upon the life of our folk, and that any organizations that offend against the foregoing demands shall be dissolved.

24. We demand freedom for all religious faiths in the state, insofar as they do not endanger its existence or offend the moral and ethical sense of the Germanic race.

The party as such represents the point of view of a positive Christianity without binding itself to any one particular confession. It fights against the Jewish materialist spirit within and without, and is convinced that a lasting recovery of our folk can only come about from within on the pinciple:

COMMON GOOD BEFORE INDIVIDUAL GOOD

25. In order to carry out this program we demand: the creation of a strong central authority in the State, the unconditional authority by the political central parliament of the whole State and all its organizations.

The formation of professional committees and of committees representing the several estates of the realm, to ensure that the laws promulgated by the central authority shall be carried out by the federal states.

The leaders of the party undertake to promote the execution of the foregoing points at all costs, if necessary at the sacrifice of their own lives.​

Way before Hillary Clinton announced her war against the cult of the individual, the National Socialist German Workers Party launched their own war against the individual. As one can easily read, it's roughly half nationalist creed and half Occupy Wall Street. To understand this, one need only educate oneself as to the forces within Germany at that time. The left was ascendant, in Germany as in other Western nations. The traditional right wing party, supporting the Kaiser, was virtually gone. The two strong forces within Germany were collectivism (socialism and Communism) and nationalism. On the left, the National Socialist German Workers Party competed with several groups, notably the Communists (who owed fealty to Moscow and aimed for one worldwide Communist government) and the SDP or Socialist Workers Party of Germany. The SDP was the amalgam of the General German Workers Association (Allgemeiner Deutscher Arbeiterverein or ADAV) and the Social Democratic Workers' Party of Germany (Sozialdemokratische Arbeiterpartei or SDAP), and the same 1875 conference that produced the merger produced the famous Gotha Program. (If one wishes to truly understand the political landscape of the time of Hitler's rise, one should research not only the Gotha Project but also Marx's criticisms of it and the more Marxist Erfurt Program into which the Gotha Project evolved.) By the establishment of the National Socialist German Workers Party circa 1920, socialism was THE dominant political philosophy in Germany as workers demanded abolition of the old class system and financial domination of the many by the few. The main differentiation was that the Socialist Workers Party of Germany and National Socialist German Workers Party were strongly centered on a Germans-first policy, whereas the Communists were centered on Moscow (by Hitler's time the center of Marxist philosophy) and one-world Communism or socialism (such as the International Workingmen's Association) and the Assembly of German Worker Associations (Verband Deutscher Arbeiterverein or VDAV) was apolitical. Right wing philosophy had most died out with the Kaiser's abdication (which in fact a member of the SPD, Social Democrat Philipp Scheidemann, had engineered by the simple fact of announcing that the Kaiser had abdicated before he had in fact agreed to do so - although I believe Prince Maximilian von Baden had already promised the Allies the abdication as a condition of a cease-fire. I'd have to look up who announced it first.) Regardless, Germany experienced a left wing revolution much as did Russia. The abdication pretty much destroyed the royalists, already a party and a philosophy very much in the minority. During the Wiemar Republic, conservatives were very much a minority, but were represented by four conservative parties (the German National People's Party or DNVP, the People's Right Party or VRP, the Christian Social People's Service or CSVD, and the Conservative People's Party or KVP) as well as by several agrarian-based parties. There were also several explicitly liberal (as in Western Liberalism, not socialism) parties and a Catholic Party. Monty Python's sketch is no doubt based on the plethora of political parties with very similar and almost interchangeable names which prospered during the Weimar Republic.

Even though the SDP party was officially banned, its members dominated the Landtag by the twenties. As socialism was by far the dominant political philosophy of the time, the SPD was the Nazis' primary opposition. What put Hitler on top was not his philosophy, but his prescience in forecasting economic doom. Germany was quite prosperous in the twenties, but on borrowed money, mostly from the United States. When Wall Street crashed, cash-strapped American financiers stopped reissuing loans to Germany and indeed, called many loans short, either because they desperately needed the cash or because they feared if they didn't take lesser payment then, they might not receive anything when the notes were actually due. Germany's economy crashed; unemployment soared, the value of labor plummeted, wages and hours dropped, tariffs were reinstated to protect domestic producers, prices increased . . . As Hitler had long been forecasting economic disaster from capitalism (especially Jewish capitalism), he looked smart, and Germans decided that if he could predict the crash, maybe he could fix it as well. The rest is history.

All this is readily available, although one will probably have to actually read books of the time rather than checking wikipedia. The choice is yours to be educated or be willfully, simplistically and comfortably stupid. Choose wisely.
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
See even Moonbeam knows this shit.

On a side note, the OP opines that college campuses produce liberals. Where do the Republicans come from?
Sometimes liberals get robbed. Sometimes liberals get religion. Sometimes liberals get jobs. (Well, non-government jobs.)

Anyway, nothing wrong with liberals. Western Liberalism produced virtually all the freedoms we today take for granted. The problem isn't liberals, it's progressives. Liberals promote freedom; progressives promote government forcing uniformity. (Kind of like conservatives, only we usually do it based on Judeo-Christian values rather than the groupthink of the moment.)
 

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
16,188
14,092
136
Um, no. The National Socialist German Workers Party is universally agreed upon by PROGRESSIVES to have been extreme far right wing. You know, by the same people who insist that there is no right to speech they dislike. More reasonable people recognize that the National Socialist German Workers Party, while starting as a left wing party competing with the German Communists, had elements common to both left wing and right wing parties both in Germany and in other nations, as well as recognizing that in the end its evil far outweighs its politics.

No, it's historians, not just "progressives." There were socialist (i.e. pro worker) elements in the original party platform, but those didn't play out when the Nazis actually came to power. For example, one of the first things the Nazis did while in power was to disband all the labor unions and replace them with Nazi fronts. They also hanged workers who tried to strike. Not very "leftist." Why did they do this? To placate wealthy industrialists whom Hitler needed to ally with to boost military production.

The real socialists in the party were either ejected, or else purged in the blood bath of 7/2/34.
 
Last edited:

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
16,188
14,092
136
<sigh>

For those not too vapid or too entrenched in partisan ignorance to learn, I offer the twenty five points of the National Socialist German Workers Party. Note that these are available in many, many places.

Ask yourself which of these things formulated in 1920 were actually done after they took power. For example, the banning of profit from war production was meant as an attack on the Jews, because Hitler believed that "Jewish war profiteers" had sold out the county in WWI. However, the Jews were banned from just about everything after Hitler took power, so there was no need to ban war profiteering. Indeed, to do so would have hurt Hitler's alliance with the industrialists.