• 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!

Campus Insanity vs Freedom of Speech

Jack Hays

Traveler
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
94,823
Reaction score
28,342
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
This is the most robust advocacy I have seen on behalf of campus free speech. It has never been more needed.

Campus insanity versus freedom of speech

Posted on October 21, 2017 | 220 comments
by Judith Curry
The aim of education is to make people think, not spare them from discomfort.– Robert Zimmer
Continue reading

The aim of education is to make people think, not spare them from discomfort.– Robert Zimmer

Campus craziness
In case you haven’t been following this issue, there have been some disturbing events and trends in the ivory tower. For an overview, see:

Two particular articles motivated this post:
Class struggle: how identity politics divided a campus. At Reed College, a freshman named Hunter Dillman who had been branded a racist after asking the organiser of a Latina student group an innocent question. He was ultimately hounded off campus.
Take Back the Ivory Tower. Alice Dreger, author of Galileo’s Middle Finger, describes her travails as a researcher and public speaker with a non-‘politically correct’ perspective on intersex and transgendered persons. She resigned her faculty position at Northwestern University over censorship issues. Unfortunately the article is behind paywall, you can read the intro here.
My concern is that without viewpoint diversity where everyone is heard, research and scholarship suffers. Further, students cocooning in safe spaces will be ill-prepared for dealing with the moral and political controversies and ambiguities that they will face throughout their lives. . . .

 
At the heart of this debate is identity politics and the culture of victimhood

Yeppers, and it is so nice to not be so lonely out on the trail anymore as I try to get people to care about what Victim Culture has done to us, is doing to us.
 
Jack, aren't you nearby the college of William and Mary? What is going on there?
 
This whole thing is so overblown.
 
I just got back from several days away. I'll have to look into it.

You mean that you're not aware of what is or has been going on in one of the most prominent colleges in the country? Really?
 
This is the most robust advocacy I have seen on behalf of campus free speech. It has never been more needed.

Campus insanity versus freedom of speech

Posted on October 21, 2017 | 220 comments
by Judith Curry
The aim of education is to make people think, not spare them from discomfort.– Robert Zimmer
Continue reading

The aim of education is to make people think, not spare them from discomfort.– Robert Zimmer

Campus craziness
In case you haven’t been following this issue, there have been some disturbing events and trends in the ivory tower. For an overview, see:

Two particular articles motivated this post:
Class struggle: how identity politics divided a campus. At Reed College, a freshman named Hunter Dillman who had been branded a racist after asking the organiser of a Latina student group an innocent question. He was ultimately hounded off campus.
Take Back the Ivory Tower. Alice Dreger, author of Galileo’s Middle Finger, describes her travails as a researcher and public speaker with a non-‘politically correct’ perspective on intersex and transgendered persons. She resigned her faculty position at Northwestern University over censorship issues. Unfortunately the article is behind paywall, you can read the intro here.
My concern is that without viewpoint diversity where everyone is heard, research and scholarship suffers. Further, students cocooning in safe spaces will be ill-prepared for dealing with the moral and political controversies and ambiguities that they will face throughout their lives. . . .


I understand the argument for allowing white supremacists to speak - it's a freedom of speech thing, right? So when it comes to freedom of speech, why not allow the pedophiles to speak? Yes, child porn is a heinous crime...but so is segregating businesses or cities or schools on basis of race or ethnicity. So is ethnic cleansing.

I don't have to compare it to child porn, either. How about allowing Islamic extremists giving speeches on campus calling for violent Jihad? How about allowing speeches advocating slavery?

In other words, there are - as SCOTUS found a long time ago - limits to the freedom of speech. We must defend freedom of speech when that speech does not advocate committing felonies...but if that speech does advocate the commission of felonies, especially if the speech calls for those felonies are committed on a grand scale, then yes, it really is constitutional to refuse to allow the speech on campus...or anywhere else, for that matter.
 
This is the most robust advocacy I have seen on behalf of campus free speech. It has never been more needed.

Campus insanity versus freedom of speech

Posted on October 21, 2017 | 220 comments
by Judith Curry
The aim of education is to make people think, not spare them from discomfort.– Robert Zimmer
Continue reading

The aim of education is to make people think, not spare them from discomfort.– Robert Zimmer

Campus craziness
In case you haven’t been following this issue, there have been some disturbing events and trends in the ivory tower. For an overview, see:

Two particular articles motivated this post:
Class struggle: how identity politics divided a campus. At Reed College, a freshman named Hunter Dillman who had been branded a racist after asking the organiser of a Latina student group an innocent question. He was ultimately hounded off campus.
Take Back the Ivory Tower. Alice Dreger, author of Galileo’s Middle Finger, describes her travails as a researcher and public speaker with a non-‘politically correct’ perspective on intersex and transgendered persons. She resigned her faculty position at Northwestern University over censorship issues. Unfortunately the article is behind paywall, you can read the intro here.
My concern is that without viewpoint diversity where everyone is heard, research and scholarship suffers. Further, students cocooning in safe spaces will be ill-prepared for dealing with the moral and political controversies and ambiguities that they will face throughout their lives. . . .


Meh. It's more of a RW meme that doesn't really hold up to scrutiny on the macro level.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/14/opinion/the-free-speech-hypocrisy-of-right-wing-media.html
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/education/2017/10/threat-free-speech-campus-right-wing-fantasy
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...s-milo-yiannopoulos-campus-freedom-expression
https://newrepublic.com/article/139474/myth-liberal-echo-chamber-campus
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...hing-academic-freedom/?utm_term=.f412b3070e37

It's a great way to keep the base fired up and sucker more rubes by citing handfuls of extreme examples that aren't representative of the whole, but hey, who cares? It beats an honest argument.
 
You mean that you're not aware of what is or has been going on in one of the most prominent colleges in the country? Really?

This?

Suspect arrested after bomb blast in Williamsburg, Va. - The Washington Post
[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.870588)]Washington Post › local › 2017/10/21[/COLOR]


[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.870588)][COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.541176)]3 days ago · [/COLOR]A homemade bomb was detonated Thursday in the heart of Williamsburg, Va., near both the College of William & Mary and Colonial Williamsburg. Police arrested a suspect, who was charged with committing an act of terrorism, the city said Friday night. ... Deb Cheeseboro, the college's police chief said no one was injured.[/COLOR]
 
This whole thing is so overblown.

Considering how bad the national conversation has gotten: NO

We cant even talk to each other anymore, the bare minimum in civilization, because the University has totally failed.
 
I understand the argument for allowing white supremacists to speak - it's a freedom of speech thing, right? So when it comes to freedom of speech, why not allow the pedophiles to speak? Yes, child porn is a heinous crime...but so is segregating businesses or cities or schools on basis of race or ethnicity. So is ethnic cleansing.

I don't have to compare it to child porn, either. How about allowing Islamic extremists giving speeches on campus calling for violent Jihad? How about allowing speeches advocating slavery?

In other words, there are - as SCOTUS found a long time ago - limits to the freedom of speech. We must defend freedom of speech when that speech does not advocate committing felonies...but if that speech does advocate the commission of felonies, especially if the speech calls for those felonies are committed on a grand scale, then yes, it really is constitutional to refuse to allow the speech on campus...or anywhere else, for that matter.

None of which touches on the points made in the OP narrative.
 
This?

Suspect arrested after bomb blast in Williamsburg, Va. - The Washington Post
[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.870588)]Washington Post › local › 2017/10/21[/COLOR]


[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.870588)][COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.541176)]3 days ago · [/COLOR]A homemade bomb was detonated Thursday in the heart of Williamsburg, Va., near both the College of William & Mary and Colonial Williamsburg. Police arrested a suspect, who was charged with committing an act of terrorism, the city said Friday night. ... Deb Cheeseboro, the college's police chief said no one was injured.[/COLOR]

Um, referring to the campus. Your OP?
 
I understand the argument for allowing white supremacists to speak - it's a freedom of speech thing, right? So when it comes to freedom of speech, why not allow the pedophiles to speak? Yes, child porn is a heinous crime...but so is segregating businesses or cities or schools on basis of race or ethnicity. So is ethnic cleansing.

I don't have to compare it to child porn, either. How about allowing Islamic extremists giving speeches on campus calling for violent Jihad? How about allowing speeches advocating slavery?

In other words, there are - as SCOTUS found a long time ago - limits to the freedom of speech. We must defend freedom of speech when that speech does not advocate committing felonies...but if that speech does advocate the commission of felonies, especially if the speech calls for those felonies are committed on a grand scale, then yes, it really is constitutional to refuse to allow the speech on campus...or anywhere else, for that matter.

Your constitutional analysis is incorrect. You can talk about and even advocate illegal activity all you want. The only permitted limit is speech that is likely to incite imminent lawless action, and that is narrowly construed to err on the side of free speech.

In any case, why is the "progressive" first instinct when it comes to these things so often to try to limit free speech? Or any other right, for that matter?
 

Sure. That's why the linked articles include pieces from noted RW bastions like the New York Times, the LA Times and the Huffington Post.
 
This whole thing is so overblown.

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

--Martin Niemoller
 
Your constitutional analysis is incorrect. You can talk about and even advocate illegal activity all you want. The only permitted limit is speech that is likely to incite imminent lawless action, and that is narrowly construed to err on the side of free speech.

In any case, why is the "progressive" first instinct when it comes to these things so often to try to limit free speech? Or any other right, for that matter?

Okay, I read up on it and you're right and I am wrong. Thanks for the correction. I'm not eager to admit that I'm wrong, but I think it's dishonorable to not admit when one is in obvious error. I also believe in thanking the person who corrected me, for he has helped me remove some of my ignorance. So again, thank you!

That being said, one wonders if those on the Right who want white supremacists to be able to make speeches on campus are as courageous when it comes to allowing the burning of the American flag.
 
I understand the argument for allowing white supremacists to speak - it's a freedom of speech thing, right? So when it comes to freedom of speech, why not allow the pedophiles to speak? Yes, child porn is a heinous crime...but so is segregating businesses or cities or schools on basis of race or ethnicity. So is ethnic cleansing.

I don't have to compare it to child porn, either. How about allowing Islamic extremists giving speeches on campus calling for violent Jihad? How about allowing speeches advocating slavery?

In other words, there are - as SCOTUS found a long time ago - limits to the freedom of speech. We must defend freedom of speech when that speech does not advocate committing felonies...but if that speech does advocate the commission of felonies, especially if the speech calls for those felonies are committed on a grand scale, then yes, it really is constitutional to refuse to allow the speech on campus...or anywhere else, for that matter.

So the cutoff line is felony? I guess pro legalization of marijuana advocates should have their speech rights rescinded? After all, selling weed is a felony.
 
Back
Top Bottom