Violent rioters shut down free speech at UC-Berkeley


Please consider donating to Behind the Black, by giving either a one-time contribution or a regular subscription, as outlined in the tip jar to the right. Your support will allow me to continue covering science and culture as I have for the past twenty years, independent and free from any outside influence.

Jack-booted thugs: Violent protesters tonight shut down a speech by Breibart editor Milo Yiannopoulos tonight at UC-Berkeley, once home to the Free Speech movement of the 1960s.

Hundreds of protesters began throwing fireworks and pulling down metal barricades police set up to keep people from rushing into the student union building where Yiannopoulos had been scheduled to speak. Windows were smashed and fires were set outside the building on Sproul Plaza as masked protesters stormed it, and at 6 p.m., two hours before his speech was to begin, police decided to evacuate Yiannopoulos for his own safety. The protest later moved on to city streets, where storefront windows were smashed.

Berkeley police said three to four people were injured and some people, including a man who said he had hoped to see Yiannopoulos speak, were seen with their faces bloodied. There were no immediate reports of arrests.

Police said protesters threw bricks and fireworks at police officers. University police locked down all buildings and told people inside them to shelter in place, and later fired rubber pellets into the crowd of protesters who defied orders to leave the area. Police called in support from other law enforcement agencies and warned protesters that they might use tear gas.

These protesters are no different than Hitler’s brown-shirts, aimed at intimidating and hurting those they do not like. They have made it impossible for free speech to be exercised on American campuses. Worse, it is increasingly evident that the administrations at these universities are complicit in these protests by not taking sufficient action to stop them. If you are a donor to these universities, it is time you stopped giving them money. And if they depend on tax dollars, that money faucet should be shut off, immediately.

Share

16 comments

  • Alex

    Jewish gay Milo, who is a conservative political activist at best, does not liek to wait and has started his own actions in order to protect US borders.

    MILO Begins Construction On The Wall

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OO8n42jRJyo

    MILO Addresses The UC Berkeley Riots

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-sX5JLwidE

    Milo Yiannopoulos Speaks About UC Berkeley Protesters Full Interview | Klay Media |

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=025HRyYRgFs

  • Alex

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nwOAmqWhf28

    Milo breaks it down for MEN (Transcript)

    “I want to address the men in the audience, sorry ladies. I love you but this is for the boys.
    The question posed to us today is whether we’ve reached an age of gender equality. I don’t think we have. We’ve overshot the age of gender equality by a long stretch and men of your generation are going to be the primary victims of this era.

    In secondary school you will have experienced a system that is tilted against boys. Your exams will have been primarily modular and not linear, a system that favours girls.
    Teachers will have tried to control and pathologize your boisterous behaviour, branding you young offenders for pranks, or cyber bullies, or typical male teenage trash talk. Taunting, after all, is how men bond.
    Your female peers will be encouraged at every stage of their educational journey. They will be told to join a stem field. They will be given, showered in fact with, grants and awards, prizes and encouragement. And when they do get to apply for those jobs you will be discriminated against just because they are a girl.

    You’ll be the recipients of nothing. There are no programs for men. The suggestion of having a mens officer at York University was laughed at by the student union.
    At university you will be told; that you are rapists in waiting, that you need to attend consent classes. Your natural love and affection for women will be neutered. You will be faced with an impossible choice, suppress your natural healthy romantic interest in women or risk a charge of rape or sexual harassment. If you speak out against this hostile and unfair environment you will be persecuted by rabid mobs of politically correct lunatics as well as the full force of the establishment media, as well [sic].

    When your studies are completed you will enter a jobs market that is stacked against you. With companies pressured from all directions to hire women and will be at a 2 to 1 disadvantage if you are in Stem subjects and possible worse in others.
    If you do happen to land a job a single inappropriate remark, or a single accusation off an inappropriate remark, or any unsubstantiated allegation can destroy your reputation forever.

    Despite all this, I’m not worried for you, because you’re men. You’re incalculable, intolerable. Impossible obstacles have been placed before you precisely to overcome, and overcoming is what men do best. It’s the nature of men to battle on, under impossible odds. We do that in war. We do that in all sorts of things, and we will do it here.

    Throughout your education you will be fed a grim history of what men have done through the centuries, and be told that straight white men are worse than the Nazis. You will be told nothing good about your sex, your race, or your orientation, but I’m going to tell you something good, and it is…
    If the patriarchy exists, women should be grateful for it. It is what took us to space, it is what built roads, builds roads, it is what built the internet, it is what protects and provides for women. And if it exists, thank God [The god of the Bible] it does.
    With their strength and determination men have tamed the wilderness. Men built cities and walls around us. They built buildings that we’re in. Their curiosity led us to explore the oceans. Their ingenuity has allowed us to reach the moon. And whenever feminism rises up and tries to ridicule you, to demean you for what you are, and you know…

    It’s interesting, like … I was gonna’ talk at this university we’re at and I was called by my interlocutor troll. She said it would demean the institution to have me here. When she talked about it, the Sunday Times asked if I respected journalist, she sought to demonize him even though he’s not here to defend himself. She said Martin Daubney was a bad person. Martin Daubney’s a close friend of mine, he’s a great person. He’s spent the last five years of his life advocating for the rights of men and boys, but this is what they do, don’t pay any attention to it, don’t listen to it. We’re not in an age of gender equality. Straight white women in the west are the most privileged class in the history of our species, but we move on.”

  • Insomnius

    Holding them to the law is a good start!

    “If U.C. Berkeley does not allow free speech and practices violence on innocent people with a different point of view – NO FEDERAL FUNDS?” – Donald Trump

  • wayne

    Insomnius: good stuff.
    Only 1 arrest, the whole night?
    (jeez, anyone with an out-of-state ID who is rioting, violates at least 2 Federal laws, and everyone else (rioting) is violating multiple State and Local laws.)

    In my Biz, we call this type of behavior an “Extinction spike.”
    Re-arrainge the contigencies in effect and “behavior” spikes off the chart. Best thing to do is (re)impose the “new old-rules” as quickly as possible and suffer through the whining, crying, and tantrums.

    If you give them an inch, they will truly take a whole mile and more.

    Along with that, one of my ultra-brilliant, atheist, studied-under-Skinner, Behaviorist Professor’s in College, was particularly fond of drilling into all of us, on literally a daily basis;

    – “Your job is not to extract retribution for maladaptive behaviors, that’s God’s job, your job is to rearrainge the environment & alter contingencies in such a way as to punish maladaptive behaviors and reward adaptive behaviors. Never confuse behavior-change with mentalistic “thought-control,” you are only concerned with what people overtly do, not with what you or they, “think” about it.”

  • wodun

    The Democrat party’s organized violence is getting old. It is also disheartening that law enforcement does very little to protect the victims of these riots.

    Considering that Bezerkly’s President used to head the DHS, she could do a better job if she wanted.

    Also, outside agitators need not be blamed. They are Democrats and that is a national party but they use and train in the same tactics in every city in the country.

  • wayne

    Alex– Milo is an atheist if I’m not mistaken. While I do endorse a lot of his social view’s, I find his economics a bit whacky & he’s a bit too much of a Parliamentarian for me.
    That being said, he shouldn’t be shut down in Bezerkeley and he is an entertaining & enlightening speaker.

    A nicely written rant from
    Courtney Kirchoff
    via Lowder with Crowder
    http://louderwithcrowder.com/dear-violent-liberal-rioters-you-are-the-fascist-nazis/

  • LocalFluff

    There is a difference. The SA was well led with a clear purpose and was militarily organized and disciplined. It was practically a continuation of the first world war, ex soldiers who refused to return to a peaceful life and accept the peace. The anti-Trump protesters are just emotional and lost in their brains. Their hullabaloo ends when they grow tired of it, like any screaming baby finally falls asleep.

  • Alex

    @Wayne: Milo’s strength is the combination of pop culture and conservative messages, which is quite unique and very successful as we can observe. His gayness and homosexuality support this unusual combination. I see Milo as an intermediate step to more even pronounced political positions.

  • Alex

    @LocalFluff: You right about SA, the comparison does not fit very well. I imagine that only 10% SA men, compared to the whole number of violent leftist, are sufficient to end these street fights for ever. Please do not see this as an attempt to support SA, but I would like to demonstrate that these leftist people are at most physical weak persons and cowards in reality, which are not able to face a real enemy.

  • Insomnius

    The millenial brownshirts of today protest everybody that they don’t agree with. They claim that they are the victims, but they are the ones who are doing all the victimizing.

    “It is also disheartening that law enforcement does very little to protect the victims of these riots.”

    We don’t have to wait for law enforcement.

    “… demonstrate that these leftist people are at most physical weak persons and cowards in reality, which are not able to face a real enemy.”

    So true, but if they can do this, it will require people who can stay calm, cool, and collected in situations like the above. For an example, Veterans for Standing Rock were standing up to our own government without any incident of violence. The only violence done there was done by our own government. If they could do that, imagine what they could do with these guys.

  • Edward

    This kind of behavior is why Clinton lost the election. She was seen as a lawless person who, like Obama before her, would not bring peace and sanity back to the country. Pretty much anyone could have won against her, the communist Sanders being an obvious exception. Even Democrats were bailing out on her and voting Trump.

    Even Democrats crossed political lines to vote for Trump. Why? Because America is getting tired of bad behavior. There was a time when it meant something, such as in the Civil Rights Movement or the Free Speech Movement, but now it is merely daily news fodder about being bigoted against the right — the same kind of bigotry that the Republicans’ Civil Rights Movement was against.

    These rioters fail to see the irony that it is they, not the conservatives, who behave badly and shut down those who have actual legal rights. That the campus administration did not protect Milo Yiannopoulos’s right to speak is shameful, but to encourage the riot is worse.
    http://news.berkeley.edu/2017/01/26/chancellor-statement-on-yiannopoulos/
    In our view, Mr. Yiannopoulos is a troll and provocateur who uses odious behavior in part to “entertain,” but also to deflect any serious engagement with ideas. He has been widely and rightly condemned for engaging in hate speech directed at a wide range of groups and individuals, as well as for disparaging and ridiculing individual audience members, particularly members of the LGBTQ community. Mr. Yiannopoulos’s opinions and behavior can elicit strong reactions and his attacks can be extremely hurtful and disturbing.

    In the entire letter there is not one word suggesting that a riot should not happen, and plenty of CYA language for the event of the riot that the administration seems to know will occur.

    The letter only says that the university is required to allow him to speak, but it fails to say that it is the duty of the students to allow him to speak. At best is says that the right should embarrass itself with its rhetoric. It failed to mention that the left and the campus would be even more embarrassed by a riot. How many Americans heard about the riot vs. the number of Americans who have heard what Yiannopoulos said or did to deserve such a riot? How many of you, dear readers, know what he has said or done? I don’t. And I don’t care, because if it were bad enough to deserve a riot, everyone would have been aware of it — and Yiannopoulos — long ago. Come to think of it, how many Americans know the name Yiannopoulos, even after the riot was about him?

    Also from the campus’s letter: “In addition, however, we have also clearly communicated to the BCR that we regard Yiannopoulos’s act as at odds with the values of this campus.

    What act is it that is at odds? The only act mentioned in the letter is that Yiannopoulos will speak. Thus, the letter declares that for Yiannopoulos’s to speak is at odds with the values of the campus.

    Also from the campus’s letter: “We have emphasized to [the BCR] that with their autonomy and independence comes a moral responsibility for the consequences of their words, actions, events and invitations – and those of their guest.

    But somehow the campus failed to have consequences for those who did not act according to their rights to protest but rioted instead. The only single arrest was for failure to disperse. What a terrible crime, to be standing around all alone, needing dispersal. Yes, I am laughing at the Berkeley police at their nonsensical arrest after a riot.

    Also from the campus’s letter: “Nothing we have done to plan for this event should be mistaken as an endorsement of Yiannopoulos’s views or tactics. Indeed, we are saddened that anyone would use degrading stunts or verbal assaults on marginalized members of our society to promote a political platform.

    Yet, the campus was not saddened that such stunts and assaults were used on the very person that the campus administration itselfmarginalized throughout the letter.

    Now that the university’s ass is properly covered, violently riot away. To paraphrase “The Princess Bride”: Have fun smashing the buildings!

    From the Louder with Crowder article that wayne linked: “Donald Trump supporters? They’re not destroying your property. They’re not pepper-spraying you for your spoken words. But you are. You’re the ones behaving like Nazis. You’re the ones actively calling for violence against people you disagree with. Am I making this point clear enough? You embody all that you claim to hate.” [emphasis in the original]

    Irony alert.

    From Robert’s article: “‘It’s not a question of free speech,’ a protester said via megaphone, riling up the hundreds of protesters. ‘It’s about real human beings.’

    Because Yiannopoulos is not a real human being?

    Could any one of those protesters have stated one thing that Yiannopoulos has done or said in the past that is so hateful that his free speech should be violated or that shows that he is not a real human being? I didn’t think so.

    Also from the article: “But UC Berkeley sophomore Jonathan Gow, 19, rejected Yiannopoulos’ insistence that free speech took a hit. ‘The whole reason we’re here is for free speech,’ Gow said. ‘Milo’s hate speech is not allowed here. When it’s hate speech, our free speech is to shut him down.’

    What are they teaching these days? It used to be that free speech was cherished, cherished enough for the Free Speech Movement to be born on that very campus.

    It used to be that free speech was cherished so much that even though I disagreed with what you said, I would fight to the death for your right to say it. Today, free speech is ‘only for me and not for thee.’ Today, free speech is not for “hate speech,” which is defined as anything I disagree with. Under that definition, these violent people, with whom I disagree, would be haters. Today, free speech is only for speech that I agree with. No wonder liberals all agree with each other and shun anyone who don’t agree until they come around and agree, even friends that are liberals.

    Free speech means that all speech must be allowed, not just the easy, agreeable speech. Otherwise there would be no need for protection of free speech. It is the disagreeable, hateful speech that must be protected. Another lesson not passed on by the campus administration’s letter. What kind of terrible educators are those guy, anyway.

    Come to think of it, violence is defined as hate speech:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech
    hate speech is described as speech, gesture or conduct, writing, or display which is forbidden because it incites violence or prejudicial action against or by a protected group, or individual on the basis of their membership to the group, or because it disparages or intimidates a protected group, or individual on the basis of their membership to the group.

    Yiannopoulos’s membership of the group of right-thinkers is why these violent students (students of violence?) protested his point of view. It is his membership as a right-leaning conservative that causes these students to hate what he says so much that they are willing to vandalize and commit arson against their school. The very first sentence of the article describes his group: right-wing provocateurs.

    Yet the question is, what trouble did Yiannopoulos provoke? We know what trouble the rioters provoked, but Yiannopoulos didn’t even get to speak. Indeed, the campus’s administration seems to be the provocateur through the use of their letter.

    And yes. I haven’t donated to the university in a few years, and I will never donate again. I have better uses for my money. Such as donating to Behind the Black.

  • Edward wrote: “And yes. I haven’t donated to the university in a few years, and I will never donate again. I have better uses for my money. Such as donating to Behind the Black.”

    For which I thank you deeply.

  • wayne

    Edward-
    Good stuff. (double-plus good!)

    If you went to Berkeley, dude…I’m impressed! (sincerely). and…your Tales from College, make even more sense to me now!
    Have a good friend with a chemical engineering degree from Berkeley. (’78) He never had the time (nor the inclination) to riotously-party, and he’s assured me there was no way he could have ever “faked it” getting through.

  • Edward

    Robert,
    You are welcome.

    LocalFluff,
    You wrote: “There is a difference.”

    Not as much as you may think. As with the WWII example, the leadership are the veterans of the 1960s and the ground-pounders are the newbies who want to recreate the 1960s — I know; I was on campus in the 1980s when students (especially freshmen) would tell each other after a rally on Sproul Hall steps that it was “just like the ’60s.” That today’s protesters want to live in the past says a lot.

    Those protests were not like the 1960s, of course, because the causes of the 1980s were for people half a world away, literally, because the big thing then was apartheid in South Africa. In the 1960s it was personal, as each of the protesters could either be drafted into an unpopular war or had a boyfriend or brother who could be.

    In 1964, when the Republican Martin Luther King made peaceful protests popular, it was also personal; either the protester was discriminated against or a friend of the protester was. Notice that the protests were peaceful, but the violence was initiated by liberals and Democrats, such as governors. A couple of years later, the liberal Democrat hippies took up the tactic, added to it, and things turned violent, once again with the liberal Democrat hippies initiating the violence, such as during the Free Speech Movement.

    There may be less military training in today’s rioters than in the SA, as in no boot camp, but the rioters’ organizations have existed for half a century, and the leaders have decades of experience on the ground.

    Alex wrote: “these leftist people are at most physical weak persons and cowards in reality, which are not able to face a real enemy.”

    In another thread, wayne pointed out that there is a way to handle protesters. Notice that for each perp taken down, there are two riot squad members to guard against counterattack and that there are several riot police securing the perimeter.
    http://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/trumps-top-five-picks-for-supreme-court/#comment-961300

    The police do not have to get all of them, just enough to make the point that rioting is not acceptable in this town.

    UC Berkeley has had violent protests in the past, possibly more than Portland, yet neither they nor the City of Berkeley Police Department are capable of handling a riot. Thus, through inaction, they are implicitly encouraging riots.

    I have been on the Berkeley campus during protests, not just rallies, and have seen how they handle arrests. The campus police set up a perimeter, then announce that arrests will happen to anyone remaining within the perimeter — an hour later. This reduces the number of arrests, because those who bore easily (or want to get back to any rioting that may be happening) leave in the first 15 minutes, and those who do not want an arrest record leave in the last 15 minutes. Only those who want to be arrested for bragging rights are arrested. They may think that they are badass, but when it comes time to sit on the Group W bench (from Alice’s Restaurant), everyone else moves away from them when they say that they were arrested for failure to disperse.

    It is astonishing that these protesters do not see the similarity between themselves and the NAZIs who got into power by shutting down their opposition through shouting, intimidation, and violence. It can only mean that the schools have taught the wrong lessons about Hitler and his minions. They probably do not even know that the NAZI Party is short for the Nationalist Socialist German Worker’s Party. The NAZIs were not right wing, but they were farther to the right than the socialists who teach our children, which may be why they consider it to be right wing.

  • Edward

    Here’s how much Democrats and even the left dislikes these violent protests:
    Occupy Wall Street was a mostly peaceful protest, and many people were willing to ignore the crimes and rapes (they even had to have special tents set up to keep women safe) in order to make the larger point, which was … even they didn’t know.
    http://occupywallstreet.net/learn
    “They” seems to be the Obama administration.

    The people participating in OWS did not seem to put much store in the laws of the land, most of their complaints were about lawful actions, and many, most, or all of the groups illegally camped in public spaces where overnight camping was expressly forbidden, so lawlessness was a staple within each of the groups. The movement lasted for months, even surviving a winter, when it was not so much fun to camp outdoors. It looked like this popular, lawless movement was here to stay.

    However, the whole thing fell apart the day that it was revealed that organizers of the movement were, in fact, terrorists bent on blowing up bridges and committing other mayhem, leaving tons of trash, tents, and hazardous waste to be cleaned up by the victim-cities.

    There is only so much that even Democrats, liberals, and lawless useful-idiots are willing to put up with. That is why the criminal, Clinton, lost the election. That is why Democrats crossed party lines to vote for Trump. That is why Clinton had more faithless electors than any other living candidate. That is why rioting at Berkeley and shutting down free speech in the name of free speech is counterproductive.

  • wayne

    Edward–
    Good stuff!

    And, you are absolutely correct about the general mindset of the 70’s/80’s, there was this odd “nostalgia” among (some) young adults, who felt like they “missed out on the 1960’s,” whatever that actually meant to them individually. And Academia played on all that.
    The Radical Left of the 60’s, grew up and took-over, in large measure. Bill Ayer’s, for gods-sake, became a tenured “expert” in Childhood Education, and taught 3 generations of Teacher’s, how to teach your children, to hate you & their Country.

    It was, an ‘electric’ time, “the 60’s.” Which means something different for anyone who was an actual “adult” in the decade, rather than “grew-up” through the decade.

    We’ve been reaping the whirlwind, from 50 g-d years ago! It’s unreal.
    (I’ll throw in a plug for Hillsdale College at this point. Sent my daughter, best money I ever spent in my life.)

    Alice’s Restaurant
    Group W bench
    https://youtu.be/b0a6iWHSWbA?t=111

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *