Flagged him. Unfortunately, I can’t call any of the impersonator alts out on Jez. I got shadowbanned years ago, probably as part of a blanket ban when one of the writers was called out by a large group of Kinja posters for claiming that owning your own home made you some kind of vicious monster. I was commenting in…

You realize that I mentioned the site, and not the author, right?

So by not saying anything about a murder victim she’s saying people should die?

I mean, replace “Rowling” with literally anyone. It’s a generic statement about how “deplatforming” doesn’t work, because it doesn’t actually refute the “bad ideas,” it just shows that there’s a big enough group of whiners to make whatever institution runs the venue think that it’s more trouble than it’s worth to host…

When did JK Rowling say you should die?

He’s not comparing Davis to Milo, he’s comparing censorship to censorship.

So censorship and deplatforming are fine, so long as it is not the government offering it? I fundamentally disagree. Censorship is wrong as a matter of principle regardless of who is doing the censoring.

I am not at all convinced that that problem is restricted to the Republican Party these days.

By your logic, we should just let them say whatever they want with no refutation and no consequences at all for fear that they’ll become more famous for being “canceled.”

I don’t know how to explain it, but I’d rather watch a 9-part series about a gruesome, brutal serial killer than 20 minutes listening to a phone call with a pedophile. 

Pretty unusual for a one-term president.

Mr. Dafoe asks for this and he’s a “team player”.

The problem is that the problematic ideas are still very easily accessible, and “deplatforming” inevitably creates has a Streisand-effect backlash of making those ideas much more publicly known than had the original speaker just been allowed to speak to 20 people who already agree with them.

My feeling was, you are giving this man way more power than he deserves by behaving in this way. It made Milo look sexier and edgier than he deserved to look.

But deplatforming JK Rowling doesn’t show anyone that she’s wrong—the only thing it proves is that there is a group of people large enough and loud enough and threatening enough to demand that she be silenced.

Then you’re letting dangerous ideas go unchallenged. Which is the whole point of people like Milo doing these speaking engagements, to seed their disgusting rhetoric into an environment where it’s normally not as present.

If a speaker is invited to a public university, their speech is protected by the First Amendment. To deplatform them—no matter *who* they are—is censorship.

Color me motherfucking shocked, The AV Club comes out in favor of censorship. Kind of, what are the words I’m looking for, flies in the face of the anti-authoritarianism the club professes.

What a weird take on what Rowling said.

What she’s saying here isn’t antithetical to what she’s said previously. She’s for open debate and against forced de-platforming. Anyone interested in looking at public statements she’s made prior to whenever it became convenient to start caring can see that she’s been consistent; the issue is that there is an…