• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

University of Kansas Student Government Controversy Highlights Overdramatization

Fiddytree

Fiddytree

Neocon Elitist
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2008
Messages
30,277
Reaction score
17,796
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Three student-government leaders at the University of Kansas at Lawrence face a difficult decision on Wednesday afternoon, one that a number of college administrators nationwide have grappled with in recent weeks as racial tensions have swirled on campuses.They must decide whether to heed student activists’ calls for them to step down.
The divisions that have emerged at the Kansas flagship came into sharp focus last Wednesday, when the university system’s chancellor, Bernadette Gray-Little, moderated a campuswide forum on race, with 1,000 students, faculty, and staff in attendance. Many students of color described discrimination they said they had experienced, both on and off campus.
Click to expand...


All well and good. Bring you list of concerns to the student government leaders. Your list of demands, even if excessive, at least show a respect for the process.

The problem was that the student group felt their concerns were not being heeded and thus call for a no-confidence vote. But it's not an outright rejection which made them feel it was necessary to challenge the stature of the University's student government.

Their unforgivable sin? Not standing up as fast as the activist group demanded of everyone in the room.

At the event, members of an activist group known as Rock Chalk Invisible Hawk suddenly rose up and took the stage to read a list of demands for change. The group then called for the audience to stand in solidarity with students of color and to proclaim that "black lives matter."
Click to expand...
Jessie Pringle, the student-body president, and Zach George, the vice president, have faced allegations that they did not stand up right away, though they have challenged that assertion. Neither of them responded to requests from The Chronicle for comment on Tuesday.
Click to expand...


At Kansas, Student Leaders Take the Blame for Racial-Climate Concerns - The Chronicle of Higher Education

That's right, ladies and gentlemen. Not giving into a verbal cue requiring physical activity or not doing so with the swiftness demanded of them by the audience is enough to declare student government representatives as needing to be removed from their respective offices.

If your response is "oh for ****'s sake," then you'd be right.
 
Buncha crybullies.
 
Fiddytree said:
All well and good. Bring you list of concerns to the student government leaders. Your list of demands, even if excessive, at least show a respect for the process.

The problem was that the student group felt their concerns were not being heeded and thus call for a no-confidence vote. But it's not an outright rejection which made them feel it was necessary to challenge the stature of the University's student government.

Their unforgivable sin? Not standing up as fast as the activist group demanded of everyone in the room.



At Kansas, Student Leaders Take the Blame for Racial-Climate Concerns - The Chronicle of Higher Education

That's right, ladies and gentlemen. Not giving into a verbal cue requiring physical activity or not doing so with the swiftness demanded of them by the audience is enough to declare student government representatives as needing to be removed from their respective offices.

If your response is "oh for ****'s sake," then you'd be right.[/FONT][/COLOR]
Click to expand...

The article you quote is inconsistent with the statement from the Student Executive Committee issued which states a number of issues, none of which is "they didn't stand up fast enough" (It was "they refused to stand up at all")

https://twitter.com/CassidyRitter/status/665315186157289473
 
And now comes Princeton's Black Lives Matter:

Black Lives Matter activists at Princeton University have taken over the president’s office and say they won’t leave until the school acknowledges former U.S. president Woodrow Wilson as a racist and renames all buildings currently honoring him on campus.

Princeton Students Demand Erasure Of Woodrow Wilson | The Daily Caller
 
Just as a lighthearted aside, a blind item making the rounds last week was about the parents of a college kid who phoned home excitedly to tell them he was going to be cutting classes to take part in protests, and his mom and dad told him to get his ass back to class. Kid is widely identified as Truman Hanks (Stanford).
 
nota bene said:
And now comes Princeton's Black Lives Matter:

Black Lives Matter activists at Princeton University have taken over the president’s office and say they won’t leave until the school acknowledges former U.S. president Woodrow Wilson as a racist and renames all buildings currently honoring him on campus.

Princeton Students Demand Erasure Of Woodrow Wilson | The Daily Caller
Click to expand...

This crap is getting out of control and it also sounds as if these students do not understand historical context.
 
this is all so very entertaining to me...

who sits on the student government is irrelevant outside of their little bubble world... fire em all for all i care.

in any event, if these kids want to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to play 'social justice warrior" to the detriment of their education... let em... it's their money to burn, and their mind to waste.
 
Thrilla said:
this is all so very entertaining to me...

who sits on the student government is irrelevant outside of their little bubble world... fire em all for all i care.

in any event, if these kids want to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to play 'social justice warrior" to the detriment of their education... let em... it's their money to burn, and their mind to waste.
Click to expand...

Sorry to inform you of this sad fact, but for many students the knowledge is irrelevant, and the GPA is their only concern. And I'd also love to know how many of these protesting students are actually putting themselves through school because in my own significant observation, students who are putting themselves through have a far more serious attitude toward the work...because it's their money and valuable time being spent when they have competing priorities such as full-time jobs.
 
sangha said:
I think it would demonstrate poor judgement, so "Yeah, it would matter"
Click to expand...

Why would it demonstrate poor judgement... because it angers already angry people and put yourself in potential danger?
 
Bodhisattva said:
Why would it demonstrate poor judgement... because it angers already angry people and put yourself in potential danger?
Click to expand...

1) as members of the student govt it's their job to represent all the students
2) it costs nothing to stand up
3) it is the right thing to do
4) not doing so might end up costing them their position in the student govt which won't look good on their resume

I could probably think of a few more reasons why, but I can't seem to come up with any good reason for remaining in their seats
 
Integrity comes immediately to mind.
 
Yes, when I think of government and politics, integrity is what comes immediately to my mind
 
sangha said:
1) as members of the student govt it's their job to represent all the students
2) it costs nothing to stand up
3) it is the right thing to do
4) not doing so might end up costing them their position in the student govt which won't look good on their resume

I could probably think of a few more reasons why, but I can't seem to come up with any good reason for remaining in their seats
Click to expand...

I can... their meeting was just over run by a bunch of disrespectful anti-democratic goons and there was a demand made for everybody to stand to respect something that they may not respect.
 
nota bene said:
And now comes Princeton's Black Lives Matter:

Black Lives Matter activists at Princeton University have taken over the president’s office and say they won’t leave until the school acknowledges former U.S. president Woodrow Wilson as a racist and renames all buildings currently honoring him on campus.

Princeton Students Demand Erasure Of Woodrow Wilson | The Daily Caller
Click to expand...

Got a suggestion for that President. Have them arrested. The presidents office is not a public area. It's a private area. As such he has the right to force them out via the cops.
 
Fiddytree said:
All well and good. Bring you list of concerns to the student government leaders. Your list of demands, even if excessive, at least show a respect for the process.

The problem was that the student group felt their concerns were not being heeded and thus call for a no-confidence vote. But it's not an outright rejection which made them feel it was necessary to challenge the stature of the University's student government.

Their unforgivable sin? Not standing up as fast as the activist group demanded of everyone in the room.



At Kansas, Student Leaders Take the Blame for Racial-Climate Concerns - The Chronicle of Higher Education

That's right, ladies and gentlemen. Not giving into a verbal cue requiring physical activity or not doing so with the swiftness demanded of them by the audience is enough to declare student government representatives as needing to be removed from their respective offices.

If your response is "oh for ****'s sake," then you'd be right.[/FONT][/COLOR]
Click to expand...

At the conclusion of the conference, a tribute to Comrade Stalin was called for. Of course, everyone stood up. ... For three minutes, four minutes, five minutes, “the stormy applause, rising to an ovation,” continued. But palms were getting sore and raised arms were already aching. And the older people were panting from exhaustion. It was becoming insufferably silly even to those who really adored Stalin.

However, who would dare to be the first to stop? … After all, NKVD men were standing in the hall applauding and watching to see who would quit first! …

[The comrades] couldn’t stop now till they collapsed with heart attacks! At the rear of the hall, which was crowded, they could of course cheat a bit, clap less frequently, less vigorously, not so eagerly -- but up there with the presidium where everyone could see them?

The director of the local paper factory, an independent and strong-minded man, stood with the presidium. Aware of all the falsity and all the impossibility of the situation, he still kept on applauding! Nine minutes! Ten! In anguish he watched the secretary of the District Party Committee, but the latter dared not stop. Insanity! To the last man! With make-believe enthusiasm on their faces, looking at each other with faint hope, the district leaders were just going to go on and on applauding till they fell where they stood, till they were carried out of the hall on stretchers! …

Then, after eleven minutes, the director of the paper factory assumed a businesslike expression and sat down in his seat. And, oh, a miracle took place! … To a man, everyone else stopped dead and sat down. They had been saved!

That same night the factory director was arrested. They easily pasted ten years on him. … After he had signed Form 206, the final document of the interrogation, his interrogator reminded him:

“Don’t ever be the first to stop applauding.”
 
And the persecution of white America continues:

KU professor who used n-word in class discussion is placed on leave / LJWorld.com

In the story and the accompanying letter, you'll find out that the professor was trying to express her difficulty in relating to minorities. In doing so she said; “As a white woman I just never have seen the racism…It’s not like I see ‘Nigger’ spray painted on walls…” For that, she is likely to be fired. The stupidity and hypersensitivity of youth and the inability or lack of willingness to stand up to them is winning the day. This woman wasn't offensive. She was trying to express how difficult it is for her to relate and now she's a sacrificial lamb.

What should whites do? Should we form our own colony and leave the US? Is that what minorities want?
 
ksu_aviator said:
In the story and the accompanying letter, you'll find out that the professor was trying to express her difficulty in relating to minorities. In doing so she said; “As a white woman I just never have seen the racism…It’s not like I see ‘Nigger’ spray painted on walls…” For that, she is likely to be fired.
Click to expand...

There's just one problem with your story - It's a lie

No one is calling for her to be fired because she used the word "nigger"

Here's the letter that explains the students position
https://medium.com/@schumaal/what-f...ed-in-coms-930-at-the-8f4914d4bbd5#.zidf71brm
6. A pattern of behavior that indicates recent issues are far from isolated and warrant Dr. Quenette’s termination.
Aside from these most recent transgressions, there are a number of other concerns we have about Dr. Quenette’s continued appointment and presence in the department. These concerns include, but are not limited to: jokes about suicide when asked how we should discuss a recent on-campus suicide with our students, disclosing personal information about other students that may pose external safety risks, and disdain and mockery for graduates in the COMS 930 course who request additional resources and support.

Dr. Quenette has created a culture of disrespect for all students by calling undergraduates “stupid” and doubting their intellectual abilities. Dr. Quenette has made it a habit to disparage the reputations of veteran GTAs in the Communication Studies department by naming them and mocking their classroom policies and procedures, and disclosing private information regarding research projects involving other GTAs. Dr. Quenette exposed information about the personal location of a former GTA in the midst of a domestic violence situation. Dr. Quenette breached FERPA regulations by showing the midterm grades of previous students during the new GTA orientation, specifically, the grades of Cassandra Bird and Michael Eisenstadt.

Given the above concerns that demonstrate Dr. Quenette’s inability to carry out key tenets and responsibilities as the Basic Course Director and COMS 930 instructor we request Dr. Quenette’s immediate termination. Dr. Quenette’s continued presence as department faculty creates an unsafe learning space and hostile work environment which puts at risk students’ ability to complete their degree programs, teach the Basic Course, and fulfill the guiding principals of the department and university writ large.

A number of complaints have been filed with the Office of Institutional Opportunity and Access about this incident and others. The response that more dialogue is needed to resolve this problem is insufficient to redress our claim that the space of dialogue is coded through terror and hostility. The belief that democratic deliberation is neutral is wrong and dangerous. We appreciate the IOA’s commitment to “students’ ability to file complaints and have their voice heard without fear of retaliation.” What is needed now is action upon those complaints. Do not allow the guise of free speech to be invoked and crowd out our demand — legal precedent indicates that Dr. Quenette’s speech is not protected by the First Amendment.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Garcetti v. Ceballos that: “when public employees make statements pursuant to their official duties, the employees are not speaking as citizens for First Amendment purposes, and the Constitution does not insulate their communications from employer discipline.” Admittedly, the Court has not settled on the question of whether or not this analysis extends to “scholarship or teaching.” The situation in which the analysis most consistency does not apply is when a professor communicates as a “citizen speaking on a matter of public concern.” Dr. Quenette was speaking directly about discussing race in our classes while assuming her role as instructor of COMS 930, a course teaching new instructors how to teach well; she was thus speaking pursuant to her official duties and not as a citizen. In Sheldon v. Dhillon, Garcetti did not apply because it could not be determined that a professor was dismissed for “conduct [that] was reasonably related to a legitimate pedagogical concern.” Dr. Quenette’s comments in this specific class, though, clearly demonstrate a legitimate pedagogical concern. The goal of the course is to produce practitioners, so by imbuing racist language, remarks, and viewpoints into the pedagogy her students were meant to replicate, Dr. Quenette was training us to perpetrate acts and ideas violating the policies of the university. Therefore, her speech is not protected by the First Amendment and employer discipline for her remarks is not only legal, but necessary based on her breach of contract.
Click to expand...
 
ksu_aviator said:
And the persecution of white America continues:

KU professor who used n-word in class discussion is placed on leave / LJWorld.com

In the story and the accompanying letter, you'll find out that the professor was trying to express her difficulty in relating to minorities. In doing so she said; “As a white woman I just never have seen the racism…It’s not like I see ‘Nigger’ spray painted on walls…” For that, she is likely to be fired. The stupidity and hypersensitivity of youth and the inability or lack of willingness to stand up to them is winning the day. This woman wasn't offensive. She was trying to express how difficult it is for her to relate and now she's a sacrificial lamb.

What should whites do? Should we form our own colony and leave the US? Is that what minorities want?
Click to expand...

I've just read the link provided in the post above and urge others to do the same. The students' accusations are many and varied (and if documentation was provided rather than hearsay, this isn't indicated).

The use of the n-word on November 12th caused "shock, anger, and pain" for all the signees. They are "requesting" that the professor be terminated for her "transgressions."

Some of the accusations are very serious. If Dr. Quenette has violated FERPA the way the students claim, she's in real trouble, and admin won't have her back.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom