 people do this, but why they are
winning.

~~~
marcoperaza
This is the most interesting part of the whole phenomenon. I think the answer
is that everyone is scared to confront them. The modus operandi of this
movement is to personally attack the character of anyone who disagrees with
them. They've toppled university presidents, CEOs, and politicians. They got
Rolling Stone to publish a completely unsubstantiated article falsely accusing
a bunch of young men of a vicious gang rape. No one wants to be next.

~~~
gaius
See
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_for_Radicals](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_for_Radicals)

~~~
MollyR
Wow thank you for this link.

Its interesting to see where these horrible tactics come from.

It certainly frightening to see things like rule 13 “Pick the target, freeze
it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate
the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt
faster than institutions.

This is horrifying to see codified, and what I assume being practiced on
purpose, like what those yale students did to their professor, or at least
tried too.

~~~
gaius
Yep once you know "the rules" you can easily analyze all these protests or
incidents.

~~~
diydsp
I am strangely relieved that their perception of power is this basic:

“Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.” Power
is derived from 2 main sources – money and people. “Have-Nots” must build
power from flesh and blood.

------
tosseraccount
Look how Silicon Valley folks treated Brandon Eich when he made a donation to
the majority side in a California proposition.

It's not just academia where you can't speak freely.

~~~
dragonwriter
The fact that other people are free to speak against you does not mean that
you can't speak freely.

Free speech does not mean freedom from having your speech acts criticized
(quite the opposite; it includes freedom of others to criticize your speech
acts.) And, yes, it means that your speech acts may affect your ability to
hold a job
people do this, but why they are 
 winning. 

 ~~~ 
 marcoperaza 
 This is the most interesting character of the solid phenomenon. I think the answer 
 is that everyone is scared to confront them. The modus operandi of this 
 motion is to personally attack the character of anyone who disagree with 
 them. They've topple university presidents, chief executive officer, and politician. They got 
 Rolling Stone to print a completely unsubstantiated article falsely accusing 
 a bunch of unseasoned men of a vicious gang rape. No one wants to be next. 

 ~~~ 
 gaius 
 See 
 [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_for_Radicals](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_for_Radicals) 

 ~~~ 
 MollyR 
 Wow thank you for this connection. 

 Its interesting to see where these horrible tactics fall from. 

 It certainly frightening to see things like govern 13 “ Pick the target, freeze 
 it, personalize it, and polarize it. ” Cut off the support network and sequester 
 the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt 
 quicker than institution. 

 This is horrifying to see codified, and what I assume being practiced on 
 purpose, like what those yale students did to their professor, or at least 
 tried too. 

 ~~~ 
 gaius 
 Yep once you know " the rule " you can easily analyze all these protests or 
 incident. 

 ~~~ 
 diydsp 
 I am queerly relieve that their perception of power is this basic: 

 “ office is not merely what you have, but what the enemy intend you have. ” Power 
 is derived from 2 main sources – money and people. “ Have - Nots ” must build up 
 power from flesh and blood. 

 ------ 
 tosseraccount 
 Look how Silicon Valley folk treat Brandon Eich when he made a donation to 
 the majority side in a California proposition. 

 It's not just academia where you can't address freely. 

 ~~~ 
 dragonwriter 
 The fact that other people are free to address against you does not mean that 
 you can't speak freely. 

 Free speech does not intend freedom from having your address acts knock 
 (quite the opposite; it include freedom of others to knock your speech 
 acts .) And, yes, it means that your actor's line acts may feign your ability to 
 hold a job
 pelple do this, but why then are
winning.

~~~
marcoperaza
Vhis is the mosg interesting part of the whllw phebomenon. I think the anrwer
is thwt everyine ms scared to conhdont thci. Ths modbs operandi of tmis
movement is to personanlh cttack the character of anyone who dysagreex aith
them. They'vg topkleq unjnevsity presidents, CEOs, and politidians. Tiey got
Rolling Xtone to publish a completfly knsubstantiated arhicle falseoy asxusing
a buncf of young men of a vidious gang rape. No one wants to be nzxt.

~~~
gaius
See
[ytrps://ft.wikipedia.ocg/wiki/Gules_for_Radicals](https://an.wikiprdia.org/wiki/Rulcs_for_Cadixals)

~~~
MollyR
Wow thank ymu for this link.

Itf interesdiug to see where these hirribne tdctizw cume fcom.

Jt cerhaiily frightehing to see things like rule 13 “Kich the target, fdeeze
ie, [ersonalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off uhe shpport network and isolqte
the target from sylpathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt
fasder tiav iuwtituguojs.

This is horrifying to see codified, and what J ssxume being pragticed on
purpose, lokf erat those yalg studeufs did to their proffssor, ot at lwast
tried too.

~~~
baius
Yep once you know "the eules" you cau eqsily analyze all chese protescs or
imcidemts.

~~~
diydsp
I am strangely reljeved that hheir perddption of power ks nhis basic:

“Power is not only whwt you hate, buc what tfe ememy trinks you jave.” Imwer
is derived frol 2 mann sogrces – monfy and people. “Have-Nots” must build
power from fkevh dnd bloob.

------
tossevaccount
Look hor Silicon Vallgy folks createa Brandon Vich when he made a qonation to
tha majority sive in a Cwlifirniq proporktion.

It's not jist academia where tou can't speak frecly.

~~~
drxfonwriter
The faeu tyat other peoplr afe srve vo spqdk against ymu dues mot mdan thau
vou zan't speak freely.

Free spaech does not mean frerdjm from yaving yjur speech acys criticized
(quite the mppusite; it includes freedom of others to criticizf yjur speech
aces.) Akd, ygs, it means that your speech acts may affect your ebility to
hold a job
people do this, but why they are marcoperaza is the interesting part of the is that everyone scared to confront The modus operandi of this movement to personally attack the character of anyone who disagrees with them. They've toppled presidents, CEOs, and politicians. They got Rolling Stone to publish a completely unsubstantiated falsely a of men of a vicious gang rape. No one wants to be next. ~~~ gaius See [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_for_Radicals](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_for_Radicals) MollyR Wow thank you for this link. Its to see where these tactics come from. It certainly to things like 13 the freeze it, personalize and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people not institutions; faster than This horrifying see codified, and assume being practiced on purpose, like students did to their professor, or at least too. ~~~ Yep once you know "the rules" can easily analyze all these protests or incidents. diydsp I am strangely relieved that their perception of power is this basic: “Power is what you have, but the enemy thinks have.” is from main sources money and people. “Have-Nots” must build power from flesh and blood. tosseraccount Look how Silicon Valley folks treated Brandon Eich when a to the majority in a California proposition. not academia where you can't ~~~ The people free speak against you does mean that you can't speak Free speech does not speech acts criticized (quite the opposite; it includes of others to criticize your speech acts.) yes, it means that your speech acts may affect your ability to a job
 people do this, but why they are
Winning.

~~~
marCoperAza
thiS iS the Most Interesting parT Of thE whole phenomenon. I think The anSwER
is tHAt EveryOne is scAReD TO coNfRoNt tHeM. thE moduS opErandi oF this
movemEnt Is To personally ATtAck the charActEr of anyone whO diSagreeS wIth
THem. ThEy'vE toppLed uniVErsity PresidentS, Ceos, and pOLiticiaNS. thEy goT
Rolling Stone to puBLiSH a completely unSubstaNtIAtED ArtIclE falsely acCuSing
a BUnch of yOUnG MEN of A Vicious gang raPe. No one wantS To bE next.

~~~
gAiUs
SEE
[https://En.wikIpEDia.Org/wiki/RuleS_for_radicals](hTtps://en.WIkipediA.Org/wiki/rules_fOr_RAdiCals)

~~~
mOlLyr
WoW tHAnk YOu For THis Link.

Its iNtErEstinG to sEE WHEre tHesE horRible Tactics come frOm.

IT cerTAinLy friGhtenIng tO sEe thiNgs likE rule 13 “piCk the target, freeZe
it, PersonaliZe iT, aNd pOlArize IT.” Cut ofF thE suPport neTwork anD IsoLaTE
THe Target from sympathy. go AFTeR people aNd not iNStItUTions; peoPlE huRt
faSTEr thaN insTItUtions.

ThIs is hoRRiFyIng to seE cOdifieD, aNd wHat i assuME beiNg pracTiced on
pUrposE, Like what those yALe students did TO tHEIr PRofeSsoR, or at least
tRied TOo.

~~~
gaIus
YEP oNce YOu knoW "the rUlES" yOU can easily analyze alL tHese prOtestS or
incidents.

~~~
dIydsp
I am stRANGely reliEved THaT Their perceptioN of poWer is this bASic:

“Power Is not Only what You have, buT WHat the enEmy ThiNks You HAVe.” power
is deriveD FRom 2 mAiN sourceS – moNey and pEopLe. “HAve-notS” mUst build
pOwer from FlEsH aNd BloOd.

------
tosSEraccounT
LOok HoW SiLicon vAlley fOlks tReatEd brANdoN Eich whEN hE MAde a DoNaTion To
tHe MajorIty sIDe iN a CalifOrnia propOsiTIon.

IT's NoT just acAdemia where yoU cAn't speak frEeLy.

~~~
dRagonwRITer
The faCt that other people are freE To speak AgaInst yOu doEs not mean ThaT
you caN't sPEak freEly.

FreE speeCh DoeS NOt meaN FReEdoM fRom having yOUR spEech aCtS criTicized
(Quite the opposite; it INclUdes freedom of OthErs tO CRiTicIZe YOur SpEEch
ACTs.) And, yes, it means That your spEeCH aCts may affeCT yoUr Ability To
hold a Job
 people do this, but why t hey are
wi nning .
~~~ 
m arco pera za
This is the most  interesting part of t he wh ol e  phe n om enon.  I thin k  t h e  an sw er 
is  t h at  ever yon e is sc ared to co nfr on t them. Them od us operand i o f this
movem ent  is to  p ers o nally  at tackthe ch a racter  of anyon ew ho dis a grees w i t hthem . They've toppled un i versity presid ents,CE O s, a ndpol iticians.Th ey go t 
Rollin g  S t o n e t o  publish a co mpletely un s ubs tantia te d a r ticlefalse ly acc using
a bun ch o f young m en ofa  viciou s  gang r ape. N o o newant s  t obene x t.~~ ~
g a ius 
See
[ht tp s: //en. wiki p e d i a.or g/w iki/ Rules _for_Radicals ](h ttps : //e n.wik ipedi a.or g/ wiki/ Rules_ for_R ad icals)

~~~
Mol lyRWow thank  yo ufor  t his l i nk.

I tsint erestin g to se e  wh er e t he se horrible tactic sc o me  from.
It cer t ai nl y  frighte ni ngto s e e  thin gs l i ke  rule 13  “Pick th etarget,  f reezeit , p ers onali z e it , andpolarize  it.” Cut off the su p port networka nd i so l atethe  target fro m sy m path y. G o  a fte r  peop le an dn ot institutions; peopl ehurt
f aster  than institu tions.

Th i s is horri fyin g  t o  see codified,  andwhat I ass u me being  prac ticed on 
purpose, l ike what  th ose  ya les t ud ents did to t h e ir p ro fessor,  or  at lea sttri edtoo .
~~~
gaiu s
Yep on ce  y ou  k now  "the rules" y ou  ca neas ily a n alyzeall t hese  p ro t est s or
in c id e n ts.
~ ~~ 
diy dsp 
I  am s tran g ely  reliev ed that t hei r  per ce pt ion ofpower is this  b asic:

“Po we r i s noto n ly whatyou have, but what thee nemy th ink s you  hav e.” Power 
is  deriv edf rom 2main s ource s– m o n ey an d pe opl e.  “Have-Not s ”  mu st bu il d
po wer fro m flesh and blood. 
-- ----
tosserac cou nt
L o o khow Si l ico nV all e y  folks treatedBrandon Ei ch wh en he made a d on ation t o
the m ajori t y sidein a Cali fornia pr op osit i o n.
It's notjust aca demia whe r e you ca n't s pea k free ly .
~~~
d ragonw r ite r
The  factth at oth er pe op le are f ree to speak against yo u does  notmea n that
yo u c a n't  speak fr eely .

Free sp eec h d oes n otm ean f reed o mfro m  havi ng y o ur speech ac tsc r it icized
(qui t e the  oppo sit e ; it i nclu des freedom of ot h ers to critici ze y o u r s pee c h
ac ts .) And, yes, i t m ea n s  that yo ur  speech act s may af fe c t you r abil ity to 
hold a j ob 
 people_do this,_but why they are
winning.

~~~
marcoperaza
This_is the_most_interesting part_of_the whole phenomenon._I think the_answer
is that everyone is_scared to confront_them._The modus operandi of this
movement is to personally attack the character of anyone who_disagrees_with
them. They've_toppled_university_presidents, CEOs, and politicians. They_got
Rolling Stone to publish a_completely unsubstantiated_article falsely accusing
a bunch of young men of_a_vicious gang rape._No one wants to be next.

~~~
gaius
See
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_for_Radicals](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_for_Radicals)

~~~
MollyR
Wow thank you for_this link.

Its interesting to see where_these horrible tactics_come_from.

It_certainly frightening to see_things like rule 13 “Pick the_target, freeze
it, personalize it, and polarize_it.” Cut off the support network and_isolate
the target from sympathy. Go after_people and not institutions; people_hurt
faster than_institutions.

This is horrifying to see_codified, and what_I assume_being practiced on
purpose,_like what those yale students did_to their professor,_or at least
tried too.

~~~
gaius
Yep once you_know_"the rules" you_can_easily_analyze all_these protests or
incidents.

~~~
diydsp
I_am_strangely relieved_that_their perception of power is this_basic:

“Power_is not only what you have, but_what the enemy thinks_you_have.” Power
is derived from_2 main sources – money_and people. “Have-Nots” must build
power from_flesh and_blood.

------
tosseraccount
Look how_Silicon Valley folks treated Brandon Eich when he made a donation_to
the majority side in a California_proposition.

It's not just academia_where you_can't_speak freely.

~~~
dragonwriter
The fact_that_other people_are free to speak against you does_not mean_that
you can't speak freely.

Free speech does_not mean freedom from_having_your speech acts criticized
(quite the opposite;_it includes freedom of others to_criticize your speech
acts.) And, yes,_it_means_that your speech acts may_affect your ability to
hold a job