He only needed the first 7 seconds.

1. I thought conservatives were all knuckle-dragging cretins? Not intelligent, polished, logical, educated speakers who can cram more salient points into a 2-minute timed commentary period than a months worth of Nancy Pelosi's ramblings.
2. I want to correct one point that Mr. Shapiro made ... it is NOT that ANTIFA has "decided to make Berkeley their domain" ... but rather that the Berkeley (Communist, literally) City Council and the UC Berkeley (Communist, literally) Administration who have decided to ALLOW ANTIFA to make Berkeley their domain.
3. He completely SLAYED the argument about the high $ cost of conservative speakers by reminding the attended that he spoke at Berkeley LAST YEAR ... at a cost to the city and UC Berkeley of exactly $0.0
4. He correctly cited the FACT that ANTIFA is being used as the shock troops of leftist government and nefarious actors ... it is NOT the "grassroots" group of people "upset" at an "unfair" social and economic society.

Wow, Shapiro gave a little insight into Milo at the 1:22 mark. A comment on the video that explains it and I agree with, so I'll just paste it here.

1:22 ...Milo ...sent you ...a picture ... of a black baby - when your child was born? ...huh?

OH! I get it now! ...sorry, Ben... maybe I just need more sleep.

So Milo was implying that you're a "cuck"! ...you took the roundabout way to make the reference, but I finally made it there!

All the crap from that Milo guy that has come out about him is not surprising. Milo isn't a conservative. Milo is just the degenerate that conservatives liked so they could plead that they like homo's and homo's can be conservative. Pfft, Being open as MIlo is should get you a mental hospital stay until you snap out of it. If you are then you are but Keep it in your house.

The problem for the hate speech is not free speech and speech is violence club is they lack a coherent argument. As soon as someone questions them about specifics or "what if?" statements they refuse to giive a direct answer and instead revert to slogans and insults.

Who gets to decide what is hate speech? Will it pertain to all political ideologies, races, genders, religions, etc equally? What if the organisation that controls these decisions becomes controlled by your ideological opponents? What if POC say all white people are not fully human and are racist by blood and their DNA? What if male to female trans call for beating up lesbians who disagree that xy women are not exactly the same as xx-born women? What if a gay man calls for banning Islamic speakers because of the murder of gays in the ME? Progressives are under the illusion that soeech policing will just affect nonleftists. In reality, their intersectionality "to the biggest victim group goes the spoils" system will violently tear them apart.

More questions: Historically, how has suppression of free speech worked out? Which governments supprssed free speech most forcefully in the 20th century? Did it effectively suppress populist revolutions? Did it create a martyr effect? Did suppression and monitoring of speech create peaceful, stable societies? Who benefits the most from free speech suppression - the status quo establishment or political reformers recognizing the self serving rot, hypocrisy and stifling confirmity in establishment thinking? The last question might even give leftists a hint about what position they currently occupy.

In contrast, free speech proponents are very coherent. Let everyone have their say and let people hear them say it...even if some of those speakers are absolute assholes who utter nothing but moronic, ignorant thoughts and ideas.

If dangerous ideas do seem to be catching fire, you'll notice crowds getting biggger and support increasing. Kinda of an early warning system. Find out why the ideas resonate then debate the truly toxic ideas and win through persuasion. If you need to resort to official speech suppression to win then perhaps consider that it's your arguments that are weak.

But Ben Shapiro IS a cuck. It's one of the few things Milo Yabbadabbadopolis got right. My rights aren't violated one iota if that little turd isn't allowed to sanctimoniously lecture other morons that are as stupid as he is.

There are increasingly serious race issues and conflicts brewing, and like the proggies Shapiro wants to ignore it. Screw him.

That was impressive.

If speech doesn't mention violence, it isn't hate speech. The people who tend to get convicted of hate crimes in Canada are offering opinions and not violence. Maybe people need to toughen up a bit.