Milo Yiannopoulos, Racism and Hate Speech

Milo Yiannopoulos, Racism and Hate Speech Racism and hate speech have always managed to find a way to survive in America, past and present. It is certainly considered more taboo than it ever has been, yet it remains relevant in society in more ways than ever. Milo Yiannopoulos ideas and speeches are evidence of this, and his plans to speak at UC Berkeley came to a halt when some violent protesters began vandalising the area. This protest has spawned an entirely new free speech movement, aimed at supporting hate speech instead of freedom speech. Milo Yiannopoulos recently planned a speech at the University of California Berkeley as part of his nationwide tour of speeches, focused on spreading the hateful messages of the alt-right. Gathered outside of the arena where he was scheduled to speak, students began to gather in protest of the hate speech Yiannopoulos is known for. People had decided action be taken to stop Yiannopoulos from spreading his racist and transphobic views, which led to the protests (Wong). However, protests soon turned violent when a group of students dressed in black began lighting off fireworks and attacking police barricades. As the new groups protests began to escalate, it was announced that the event would be cancelled. The decision was made by Berkeleys administration for safety purposes. But in the aftermath of the whole event, many people have been left questioning the ethicality of the entire situation. Even though many may feel letting Yiannopoulos speak on campus was unethical, mostly due to his controversial hate oriented speeches and ideas, the administration defended his right to talk because they support the doctrine of free speech for all. This creates an argument on both sides of the scale of ethics. Some protesters argue that the Yiannopoulos event wasnt a matter of free speech, because he espouses hate speech, which creates the argument that the decision to hold the event was unethical in the first place (Lah, Park). Yiannopoulous hate speech is the very type of speech that is the exact opposite of the doctrines of universities that supports diversity and changing ideas. However, since he is a citizen underneath the rule of the US Constitution and Bill of Rights, he is entitled to the same rights of free speech that any other person would be. On the opposite end of the doctrine, Berkeley claims that it held the event to support its policy of free speech and openness to ide as, even if they are controversial. So in the end, the colleges decision to host the event adhered to their own ethical standards, as they support new ideas and free speech. Even though the university made the decision to host the event knowing there would be controversy, another ethical dilemma regarding the property damage requires addressing. With over $100,000 in damage, writing off the expenses is not simple project for Berkeley. From an ethical standpoint, it should be the responsibility of the protestors, or more fittingly known as rioters, to pay for the damages. However, since the university exercised their right to host this speaker, they should be responsible for the damages caused by the rioting from an accountability standpoint. The university should have previously assessed the risks of hosting the event, and therefore should be accountable for any damages that can occur as a result. It is no different from a driver assessing the risks of operating their vehicles. Even though it may not be the right path from an ethical standpoint, the responsibility bore for hosting the risk makes them accountable. Milo Yiannopoulos is a very risky and polarizing public figure, symbolic of many of the problems that relentlessly plague American society. With his most recent plans for a speech at UC Berkeley spawning violent protests, a new generation of free speech and ethicality arguments have been spawned in todays turbulent society. These arguments will most likely never end unless everyones views on ethicality line upa view hopefully all will be able to live with someday.

broom jumping Essay -- essays research papers

1. Broom jumping has become one of the most popular African traditions at weddings—traditional and African-centered. According to Harriet Cole in her book, â€Å"Jumping the Broom.† The ritual itself was created by our ancestors during slavery. Because slaves could not legally marry, they created their own rituals to honor their unions. Some say broom jumping comes from an African tribal marriage ritual of placing sticks on the ground representing the couple’s new home. 2. The jumping of the broom is a symbol of sweeping away of the old and welcoming the new, or a symbol of a new beginning. Today the ceremony can be performed at the wedding after the minister pronounces the couple man and wife or at the reception just after the bridal party enters the reception area. 3. The broom jumping ceremony is conducted by an experienced African cultural leader and can last up to 25 minutes. The ceremony includes the Bride, Groom, their families and close friends. It gives all in attendance, including guests, an opportunity to pledge their support to the union. A highlight of the cereomony is the recognition of the spiritual presence of ancestors, and the pouring of libations in their memory. The straws of the broom represent the family and the handle represents the almighty. 4. 5. A fully decorated broom can be purchased at ethnic stores or a regular household broom will suffice. Broom sizes will vary, but it doesn’t matter which you choose. If you decide to use your own broom and ...

The Advantages and Disadvantages of Living in the Country

The advantages and disadvantages of living in the country Living in the countryside has a lot of advantages, but also many disadvantages. As the advantage we can consider the fact that the country is less polluted and the traffic isn't so heavy. You are fit and you don't need to worry about your health condition, because in the countryside the air and water are so clean. In the country there are many plant species. There aren't any huge blocks of flats, modern skyscrapers or bothersome traffic jams.In the country you are free to admire the breathtaking landscapes such as huge meadows, peaceful hills or forests. You can enjoy walking in the forest and picking mushrooms or hunting. Another advantage is that you may easily build a big house and the garden, because charges for ground are much lower than in the suburbs. Moreover, living in the countryside is cheaper than it is in the city, so you probably may afford many other things, because the prices are lower. What is more, you can in vite your friends to the barbecue organized in your garden.It would be great! The other positive side is the safety. In the rural area the crime rate is much lower. There aren't a lot of housebreaks and the possibility of burglary is also lower. In the countryside people usually and keep eyes on neighbour's estates. They always react when something strange is happening. Country life is very peaceful and silent. You will enjoy the feeling of peace. However, there are a lot of positive aspects of living in the country side, there are also some disadvantages.Living in the country is slower. People don't need to hurry and have a lot of time. People in the country don't have to work so many hours as they do in the city. On the other hand, they don't earn so much money. Moreover, there aren't such interesting things to do during free time. The unemployment rate is also much higher than in the city. The problem may be also the communication. If you don't have your own car, you may have pro blem how to commute to work.The same problem concerns the access to the hospitals, schools, police stations and shops, which are usually located far from the village. Last of all, there are some dangers connected with country life such as heavy snowfall or rainfall. To sum up, I think that living in the country may have a lot of advantages such as fresh air, breathtaking landscapes and comfort, but a lot of people decide to stay in the city, due to the fact that the life in the town is easier. The easy access to shops and other institutions are the great advantage.

Power And Rights In Les Mis�rables And The Kite Runner

In our world today, the entitlement to power and rights are being abused and taken for granted. A recent example is the shooting in Las Vegas the shooter abused his power and rights of being able to carry a gun for mass destruction. He was just thinking of himself and not how it would affect others around him. In both of the books Les Misà ©rables and The Kite Runner there is great emphasis on how some people feel they are entitled to more power and try to enforce and abuse it with no thought. The Kite Runner has this character Assef, he would be defined as the physical antagonist, he represents everything bad in this society. He represents how people have power that should never have the chance to be in charge of anything. So much bad is†¦show more content†¦This helps show he needs this to feel in charge and in power. He robs the happiness of Sohrab too, but Amir stands up for him and saves him and he no longer has to suffer through Assef’s cowardness. In Les Misà ©rables, Thà ©nardier is obsessed with the thought of having money and being rich. He feels no grief for how he abuses Cosette. He has criminal records in robbery, fraud, murder, and very strong connections to the criminal world in Paris. He is incapable of sharing and having love for others because of his obsession with money and greed. The book Les Misà ©rables expresses the entitlement to power in a different but very similar way. Thà ©nardier owns a hotel and him and his wife have Fantine under the impression that they are taking amazing care of Cosette for her. Thà ©nardier takes advantage of his authority over Cosette to make her work for him. He treats his children as if they were royalty and Cosette serves as what I imagine as a slave. He is stimulating the same fate for Cosette just like Assef did to Sohrab because she is having the happiness of a child taken away from her. Cosette is only eight years old so she feels that she needs to respect the authority of him even though she doesn’t want to. To add on to his enforcement of power on Cosette he takes advantage of the fact he has a hotel, he draws people in just to take advantage of them. Once the people check in he immediately offers them