Politics Foreign Affairs Culture Fellows Program

Berkeley Students: Milo Had It Coming

You think rioting was wrong? What are you, some kind of privileged racist?

Remember last week, after the riots on the Berkeley campus, we were told that the students were peaceful, and that the violence was caused only by the “black bloc” anarchists (sometimes called “antifas,” short for “anti-fascists”)? Well, Steve Sailer has compiled op-eds from the Daily Californian, Berkeley’s student newspaper, in praise of the violence.  Here’s one from Juan Prieto, an illegal alien who said the rioters made him feel safe from the potential assault by Milo:

My campus did nothing to stand between my undocumented community and the hateful hands of radicalized white men — the AntiFas did. A peaceful protest was not going to cancel that event, just like numerous letters from faculty, staff, Free Speech Movement veterans and even donors did not cancel the event. Only the destruction of glass and shooting of fireworks did that. The so-called “violence” against private property that the media seems so concerned with stopped white supremacy from organizing itself against my community.

Everything else was an act of passive acceptance to the hate speech that was about to take place on our campus.

Here’s one from the same edition of the newspaper, written by a student who says he prefers to go to protests in women’s clothing (he’s a drag queen), but joined the black bloc for the riot:

To those who hate Yiannopoulos and the alt-right but have a hard time condoning black bloc tactics and property damage, I understand that these tactics are extreme. But when you consider everything that activists already tried — when mass call-ins, faculty and student objections, letter-writing campaigns, numerous op-eds (including mine), union grievances and peaceful demonstrations don’t work, when the nonviolent tactics have been exhausted — what is left?

Um, tolerance for the free exercise of speech?

Here’s one from a student who says that condemning the protesters is the same thing as condoning hate speech. Excerpt:

If you call the left hypocrites for being “intolerant” of Donald Trump’s token gay, you may not know what censorship or homophobia or terrorism or fascism is, but you’re correct. I won’t tolerate queer or undocumented students students being outed and harassed in my home, no matter who’s perpetrating it. Don’t play “Who’s The Real Fascist?” with me because fascists win that game every time.

If you condemn the actions that shut down Yiannopoulos’ literal hate speech, you condone his presence, his actions and his ideas; you care more about broken windows than broken bodies.

And here is one from a Berkeley alumna who said those objecting to the violent protests need to check their privilege. Excerpt:

[P]olice are violent agents of the state. They carry weapons, enforce laws that place our communities in danger and use excessive force in order to subdue and “protect.” Often, the people protesting are the same people who are at most risk for being violated by the police. Thus, the presence of police officers in riot gear — armed with less-than-lethal weapons they are more than happy to use on protesters — creates an atmosphere that perpetuates violence on community members.


To people with platforms who decide when a protest should and should not be violent: You speak from a place of immense privilege. As I recently wrote in a tirade against this brand of idiocy, asking people to maintain peaceful dialogue with those who legitimately do not think their lives matter is a violent act. Putting #LoveTrumpsHate at the end of a post is a privilege that many of you take advantage of, especially when there are those of us who know that our grandparents and parents survived hate only through the grace of violent action. No offense.

The California campus left, ladies and gentlemen. Here’s a link to the Daily Californian page that featured all the pro-violence op-eds. They speak for themselves.

Sooner or later, this has to be confronted. Doesn’t it?