No. Scrub that. The question should actually be addressed to Twitter’s chief morality policeman Jack Dorsey.
Dorsey, as we know, claims to take a very dim view of ugly, bullying, malign trolling behaviour on Twitter.
So how come this person @mittendamour has suffered no consequences for her thoroughly nasty tweet – still up at the time of writing? How does wishing more cancer on a cancer victim not count as “hateful conduct”?
The thing that puts me off libertarianism is the “more libertarian than thou” game so many libertarians like to play.
“What? You mean you don’t believe that enterprising heroin dealers should be free to ply their wares in kindergartens so as to catch ’em while they’re young? You’re not a real libertarian. You’re a fascist control freak…”
All right, I exaggerate. But the latest libertarian test is very real – and is the subject of a big falling out between two National Review writers Victor Davis Hanson and Kevin Williamson.
See where you stand.
a) Facebook, Google, Twitter etc are the equivalent of 19th Century robber baron monopolies ripe for breaking up under Anti-Trust regulation because of their overmighty power and their iniquitous war on free speech and their outrageous bias against conservatives.
b) What are you saying, man? Don’t you see, this is, like, a violation of everything we libertarians believe in? You can’t – Pass me that joint, will you? You’re bogarting it. Yes you are – where was I? Oh yeah, look, it’s like this: if you’re gonna complain about Christian bakeries being prosecuted for refusing to bake gay cakes because of they violate their religious principles, you’re just being hypocritical complaining when YouTube puts restrictions on PragerU videos because they violate their liberal principles. Either you believe in free markets or you don’t.
If you’re a) you’re with Victor Davis Hanson who outlines his case here.
If you’re b) you’re with Kevin Williamson, who has now unfathomably accepted the King’s Shilling to take on the job of house libertarian at that famous bastion of free speech, liberty and alternative viewpoints The Atlantic.
Indeed. There is not a scientific device in existence capable of measuring how little how most of us care that this frankly sinister kid was rejected by UC Los Angeles, UC San Diego, UC Santa Barbara and UC Irvine. You can bet that had he got in, he would have spent most of his time campaigning to decolonize the curriculum, transgender every bathroom, Occupy every lecture hall…
Second—and more importantly as far as Laura Ingraham’s career is concerned—you should never apologize to Social Justice Warriors (SJWs). Period.
President Trump has not let the tedious gap between Christmas and New Year go to waste.
As usual, he has been trolling his enemies like a boss:
In the East, it could be the COLDEST New Year’s Eve on record. Perhaps we could use a little bit of that good old Global Warming that our Country, but not other countries, was going to pay TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS to protect against. Bundle up!
Believe it or not, global climate change is very real even if it’s cold outside Trump Tower right now. Just like there is still hunger in the world, even if you just had a Big Mac. https://t.co/VCGyGRWGCJ
The House Natural Resources Committee has got Patagonia’s number.
No, Patagonia is not the savior of America’s protected wild spaces. It’s just another greedster corporation with an overpriced logo, trying to make a fast buck by jumping on the anti-Trump bandwagon while parading its ‘eco’ credentials.
“The assertion that ‘the president stole your land’ is designed to mislead and terrify the uninformed. Their deception speaks volumes about their contempt for rural Americans in Utah,” the committee said in a statement.
“Of course, Patagonia, a self-interested corporation like any other, knows the truth, but they don’t care. Lies and distortions are better for their bottom line,” the statement said.
It has backed up its message with this tweet:
This was in response to an earlier tweet by Patagonia:
Read the rest at Breitbart.
President Trump has offended pretty much the entirety of Britain’s political and media establishment up to and including the Prime Minister, the Mayor of London and the Archbishop of Canterbury. As a result, the Special Relationship is once more in jeopardy, and Trump has decided to cancel a planned working visit to the United Kingdom.
In a moment I shall explain why the president is right and his critics are wrong. But first a brief recap of what the fuss is all about.
Trump’s critics objected violently – or so they have publicly claimed – to three of his Twitter retweets.
These retweets showed videos, purportedly of members of the Religion of Peace (TM) behaving less than peacefully.
One depicted a bearded Muslim destroying a statue of the Virgin Mary.
One showed an Islamist mob pushing a teenage boy off a roof and then beating him to death.
One showed a white Dutch boy on crutches being gratuitously beaten up by a man described in the video caption as a “Muslim migrant”.
Prime Minister Theresa May; Mayor of London Sadiq Khan; and many other politicians professed themselves to be appalled by this. As was BBC news, which made this horror its lead story.
But it wasn’t the sadistic brutality on any of the videos that bothered them. It was the fact that the person whose tweets the President had retweeted, Jayda Fransen, is the deputy of a nationalistic, anti-immigration political party highly critical of Islam called Britain First
The nastiest person on Twitter has quit Twitter. Because I’m so generous I shan’t mention his name. All I’ll say is he that he co-wrote one of the 1990s’ warmest, funniest, daffiest sitcoms — which is possibly what made his attack-dog vitriol so especially hurtful. It was like being stabbed with a fork by Gyles Brandreth, kneed in the groin by your vicar, given the middle finger by the Queen. What, you kept wondering, could possess someone you were predisposed to admire to make them behave like such a dreadful heel?
Because social media makes monsters of us, unfortunately. Some people, at any rate. We discussed this at the weekend at the Battle of Ideas festival in London at an event called: ‘We need to talk. The vices and virtues of social media.’ One of my fellow panellists, Alex Benson, a club promoter, described the terrifying sensation of having once been caught in a Twitter storm and feeling so universally hated that he scarcely dared venture outdoors. But when he did so he discovered something odd: in real life (IRL) everyone was as perfectly affable as ever they had been. All that rage had been confined to the social media bubble.
As Benson noted, people say things on Twitter that if voiced in a pub would get you a punch in the face. This is partly because the 140-character medium encourages you to be pithy, provocative and nuance-free in order to grab other users’ attention. And partly because taking out someone when you can’t hear them squeal is much easier than killing them with your bare hands.
Do you remember that scene in Harry Potter and the Saucer Full of Surrender Monkeys where the staff and pupils at Hogwarts finally decide to abandon the struggle against the forces of evil?
Voldemort, they’ve realized, is just too darn scary; the Death Eaters are too ruddy devious, what with all their lies and ruses and shape-shifting antics; and besides, who is anyone to judge, be they witch, wizard, mudblood, or muggle, whether the forces of light really are morally superior to the forces of darkness?
“Perhaps it’s just a matter of perspective,” Hermione tells an enthusiastic, jazz-handing audience at the United Nations of Wizardry. “Maybe what we’ve been taught by our chauvinistic, patriarchal, judgmental society — that the Avada Kedavra curse is wrong; that the Cruciatus is cruel; that the world would be a better, freer, happier place if it wasn’t ruled by sinister cloaked figures who want everyone to submit to their domineering, intolerant religious death cult — are just a reflection of our white wizardry privilege.”
What happens next, of course, is the famous scene where — under the supervision of Dolores Umbrage and the Ministry of Magic — all the staff and pupils at Hogwarts hand in their magic wands and burn them on a huge pyre.