DeSantis signs bill requiring FL students, professors to register political views with state

[Swammerdami]

So many of these heated debates in America are due to polarization: Americans are no longer able to talk to each other. Here is a YouTube in which Jonathan Haidt discusses the "Structural Stupidity" which arose in America about 2012. (He blames Twitter, Instagram and other social media.) It's related to his article "Why the Past 10 Years of American Life Have Been Uniquely Stupid" in The Atlantic

Haidt's thesis is not directly related to the topic of this thread, but may help explain this and many other polarizations.

 

[Swammerdami]

First things first: saying 'sexual preference' is problematic and anti-LGBTQSS+, as Amy Coney Barrett found out. Your fellow leftists demand you do better.
. . .
And, as it happens, I am also back at university, and the university asked me my gender identity. Do you think that was improper?

I'm not sure if you've answered my question or not. To be clear, did the university ask you whether you were Hetero-, Homo-, or Bi-? Would that be a proper question to ask? If not, why is political alignment a proper question?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

So many of these heated debates in America are due to polarization: Americans are no longer able to talk to each other.

Media polarization has become intense. 40 years of right-wing AM Radio and Cable news has poisoned discourse. The right-wing has been vilifying colleges and education for decades, labeling them liberal elitists... ie people that are experts in any particular field.

Here is a YouTube in which Jonathan Haidt discusses the "Structural Stupidity" which arose in America about 2012. (He blames Twitter, Instagram and other social media.) It's related to his article "Why the Past 10 Years of American Life Have Been Uniquely Stupid" in The Atlantic

Haidt's thesis is not directly related to the topic of this thread, but may help explain this and many other polarizations.

It isn't social media. That isn't helping, but AM Radio and Cable News have been carrying the water for multiple decades before social media was invented.

And this isn't to say liberals are the wise and conservatives are the dumbs. Liberals have their weak and uneducated links and extremists. It is that the right-wing has a terribly disinformed portion of their base. That has gotten worse and worse and social media is helping that get worse, Q-Anon is one example of this. And if you look at Congress, you'll see just how far right it has gotten. Orrin Hatch used to be the crazy radical in the Senate. He'd be considered a moderate Statesman today. Multiple GOP senators called for the election to be reversed... on the record, during the count. Over half the GOP in the House VOTED to negate state EVs that didn't agree with their party choice.

All the while, moderates like Biden and Clinton are vilified as being radical liberals.

 

[Swammerdami]

So many of these heated debates in America are due to polarization: Americans are no longer able to talk to each other.

Media polarization has become intense. 40 years of right-wing AM Radio and Cable news has poisoned discourse. The right-wing has been vilifying colleges and education for decades, labeling them liberal elitists... ie people that are experts in any particular field.

Here is a YouTube in which Jonathan Haidt discusses the "Structural Stupidity" which arose in America about 2012. (He blames Twitter, Instagram and other social media.) It's related to his article "Why the Past 10 Years of American Life Have Been Uniquely Stupid" in The Atlantic

Haidt's thesis is not directly related to the topic of this thread, but may help explain this and many other polarizations.

It isn't social media. That isn't helping, but AM Radio and Cable News have been carrying the water for multiple decades before social media was invented.

And this isn't to say liberals are the wise and conservatives are the dumbs. Liberals have their weak and uneducated links and extremists. . . .

I mostly agree with you, but do watch the video! According to Haidt, teenage mental illness took a sharp "hockey-stick" spike in 2012 exactly. And by 2014 not only did the already-stupid right get even stupider, but left-leaning institutions started destroying centrism (and thus hope for national harmony) among Democrats.

 

[Metaphor]

First things first: saying 'sexual preference' is problematic and anti-LGBTQSS+, as Amy Coney Barrett found out. Your fellow leftists demand you do better.
. . .
And, as it happens, I am also back at university, and the university asked me my gender identity. Do you think that was improper?

I'm not sure if you've answered my question or not. To be clear, did the university ask you whether you were Hetero-, Homo-, or Bi-? Would that be a proper question to ask? If not, why is political alignment a proper question?

What is it that you are not sure about? I said my employer--a government department--asks me about my sexual orientation in annual surveys.

I added (because we are talking about public universities) that my current university asked me my gender identity. It did not ask me my sexual orientation. I will add, however, that your suggested list of sexual orientations would be insufficient and be met with outrage from certain leftists.

If, however, my current university asked about my sexual orientation in an annual survey of campus climate, I would think nothing untoward of it. If the university wanted to make sure people of all sexual orientations were comfortable on campus, the only way for it to determine that is to examine responses by sexual orientation.

 

[laughing dog]

The left heavily outweighs the right in US academia. Accept the fact or don't.

It is a fact you have the opinion that the left heavily outweighs the right in US. It is a fact your opinion is based on a conflation of liberal with left.

Your response is evidence that your view of what constitutes a fact is idiosyncratic.

 

[Toni]

Cool: multiple lines of evidence point to it being leftist: How about some links?

I've already posted a link.

A link to the American Enterprise Institute? Might as well post one from the John Birch Society, too.

You clearly did not read it. The AEI summarised the various data sources but did not run the surveys.

But I am glad you have been up front with your dismissal of evidence without examining it.

The left heavily outweighs the right in US academia. Accept the fact or don't.

You clearly don't understand the difference between an opinion piece and facts.

You clearly didn't read my link.

The AEI has a very clear agenda, and if you were even remotely intellectually honest, you'd post the actual sources

I did.

rather than an opinion piece written by a right wing think tank drawing their own conclusions from the data. Think tanks and industry outfits are notorious for doing shady shit like this. If we were to take them at their word, we'd still be spraying DDT on crops and watching shows like "Temptation Island - sponsored by Marlboro! Light up, kids...scientists say cigarettes are perfectly safe!"

And for the right in America, folks like Mitt Romney and Liz Cheney are now considered "the left." I'm willing to bet that if you told a Trump supporter some Ronald Reagan quotes without telling them who said the words, they'd think it was from a "radical leftist."

I posted the link to the HERI report. Not a landing page, the actual report. Read it or don't.

If you'd read it, you'd realise it is people's self-identification about their political ideology, not the AEI's opinion. Not even UCLA's opinion, who ran the survey.

But I've really lost my patience with this. I've typed and deleted insults as a result of how utterly frustrating I find the leftists here denying obvious facts is.

You clearly do not believe the left heavily outweighs the right in US academia. I can't explain why you resist this fact, but you do.

I’m proud of you for deleting insults.

 

[Metaphor]

The left heavily outweighs the right in US academia. Accept the fact or don't.

It is a fact you have the opinion that the left heavily outweighs the right in US. It is a fact your opinion is based on a conflation of liberal with left.

I already answered this pedantic-semantic (and incorrect) objection in a previous post. And I'd be willing to revise the statement to the also-correct 'liberals heavily outweigh conservatives in US academia', but you evidently have no interest in honest dialogue on this matter.

Your response is evidence that your view of what constitutes a fact is idiosyncratic.

The left heavily outweighs the right in US academia. This is true even if we explicitly exclude the people who labelled themselves 'liberal' 'middle of the road' and 'conservative' in the HERI survey.* Indeed, the number that described themselves 'far left' vastly, vastly outnumbered the number that described themselves as 'far right'.

*I will reiterate, however, that laughing dog's objection is based on the false premise that the people who described themselves as 'liberal' in the HERI survey--between the anchor points far left and 'middle of the road'--would not be considered on the left by themselves or others, and that the people who described themselves as 'conservative' in the HERI survey--between the anchor points middle of the road and far right, would not be considered on the right by themselves or others.

 

[ZiprHead]

Two notions one must consider they are US constitutional restrictions on political speech and US constitutional restrictions on objective speech. Both are protected explicitly in

 Freedom of speech in the United States​

Florida's law blatantly violates professional and political speech freedoms.

Oh yes. How?

Compelling speech.

You seem to have had a problem with that elsewhere.

 

[Metaphor]

So let's summarise the thread so far.

• ZiprHead opens with a false and hysterical thread title that equates anonymous survey responses with 'registering political views with state'
• Multiple posters deny the evidenced fact that the left heavily outweighs the right in US academia, with rebuttals such as:
  • 'I know academics of all political leanings', as if this tiny convenience sample somehow rebutted the statistics
  • A petty and false semantic argument that 'liberals' are not on the left and 'conservatives' are not on the right, despite the social understanding and survey context that explicitly places these labels on the left and right respectively
  • Multiple furphy requests for evidence that professors are indoctrinating students, and accusations of viewpoints and beliefs that nobody has uttered or implied.
• We almost get some progress from some posters (partly) dropping their absurd objection to the evidenced fact that the left heavily outweighs the right in US academia, asking why that is a problem
• We get some posters objecting to the intrusive nature of the questions, despite the fact that universities themselves ask similar and even more intrusive questions of their own stakeholders, and despite the fact that nobody can be compelled to answer any questions let alone specific questions, and despite the fact that the only way to measure culture and perceptions is to ask such questions

 

[Metaphor]

Two notions one must consider they are US constitutional restrictions on political speech and US constitutional restrictions on objective speech. Both are protected explicitly in

 Freedom of speech in the United States​

Florida's law blatantly violates professional and political speech freedoms.

Oh yes. How?

Compelling speech.

You seem to have had a problem with that elsewhere.

Nobody's speech is compelled. Nobody is forced to answer any questions. I fill out my annual employee survey every year and it would be insane to call my speech 'compelled'.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Two notions one must consider they are US constitutional restrictions on political speech and US constitutional restrictions on objective speech. Both are protected explicitly in

 Freedom of speech in the United States​

Florida's law blatantly violates professional and political speech freedoms.

Oh yes. How?

Compelling speech.

You seem to have had a problem with that elsewhere.

Nobody's speech is compelled. Nobody is forced to answer any questions. I fill out my annual employee survey every year and it would be insane to call my speech 'compelled'.

Are your bosses Reich-wingers who imply you are probably a biased leftist and then pressure you to give personal political info? Do they threaten to not pay you if not enough of you and your biased leftist colleagues don't fill the surveys out?

 

[laughing dog]

I already answered this pedantic-semantic (and incorrect) objection in a previous post. And I'd be willing to revise the statement to the also-correct 'liberals heavily outweigh conservatives in US academia', but you evidently have no interest in honest dialogue on this matter.

Honest dialogue requires adherence to the facts. Your complaint about pedantry is risible and claim that you are not conflating left and liberal is false.

The left heavily outweighs the right in US academia. This is true even if we explicitly exclude the people who labelled themselves 'liberal' 'middle of the road' and 'conservative' in the HERI survey.* Indeed, the number that described themselves 'far left' vastly, vastly outnumbered the number that described themselves as 'far right'.

Show your work or shut up

*I will reiterate, however, that laughing dog's objection is based on the false premise that the people who described themselves as 'liberal' in the HERI survey--between the anchor points far left and 'middle of the road'--would not be considered on the left by themselves or others, and that the people who described themselves as 'conservative' in the HERI survey--between the anchor points middle of the road and far right, would not be considered on the right by themselves or others.

Your reiteration is evidence you are not interested in honest discussion.
You cannot know if the self- identified liberals consider themselves “left” or not. I know many who do not. I know people who consider moderates as “left” and some who consider them “ right”.

While you are entitled to your reactionary definition of the “left”, that does not make your opinions based on your views a fact.

 

[Metaphor]

Two notions one must consider they are US constitutional restrictions on political speech and US constitutional restrictions on objective speech. Both are protected explicitly in

 Freedom of speech in the United States​

Florida's law blatantly violates professional and political speech freedoms.

Oh yes. How?

Compelling speech.

You seem to have had a problem with that elsewhere.

Nobody's speech is compelled. Nobody is forced to answer any questions. I fill out my annual employee survey every year and it would be insane to call my speech 'compelled'.

Are they Reich-wingers who imply you are probably a biased leftist and then pressure you to give personal political info? Do they threaten to not pay you if not enough of you and your biased leftist colleagues don't fill it out?

Do you think your rhetoric and your insinuations are conducive to constructive dialogue?

 

[Metaphor]

I already answered this pedantic-semantic (and incorrect) objection in a previous post. And I'd be willing to revise the statement to the also-correct 'liberals heavily outweigh conservatives in US academia', but you evidently have no interest in honest dialogue on this matter.

Honest dialogue requires adherence to the facts. Your complaint about pedantry is risible and claim that you are not conflating left and liberal is false.

I have explained, more than once, why in the context of my statement and in the context for the evidence for my statement, liberals are part of the left. They are not the only people on the left. For example, there are also left-leaning centrists and the far left who are in the left.

The left heavily outweighs the right in US academia. This is true even if we explicitly exclude the people who labelled themselves 'liberal' 'middle of the road' and 'conservative' in the HERI survey.* Indeed, the number that described themselves 'far left' vastly, vastly outnumbered the number that described themselves as 'far right'.

Show your work or shut up

I have, more than once. Read my posts or shut up.

*I will reiterate, however, that laughing dog's objection is based on the false premise that the people who described themselves as 'liberal' in the HERI survey--between the anchor points far left and 'middle of the road'--would not be considered on the left by themselves or others, and that the people who described themselves as 'conservative' in the HERI survey--between the anchor points middle of the road and far right, would not be considered on the right by themselves or others.

Your reiteration is evidence you are not interested in honest discussion.
You cannot know if the self- identified liberals consider themselves “left” or not.

I know that liberals are not morons, and in both the context of the survey, and the wider context of American society, liberals are part of the left and conservatives are part of the right.

I posted the HERI survey which includes the instrument.

I know many who do not. I know people who consider moderates as “left” and some who consider them “ right”.

Irrelevant. The HERI survey is self-identification. And the HERI survey was not an analog scale. Any left-leaning or right-leaning centrist would choose the label that best fits them.

While you are entitled to your reactionary definition of the “left”, that does not make your opinions based on your views a fact.

I can show you the evidence. I can't understand it for you.

EDIT: In any case, as I've said repeatedly, I can substitute the also-correct statement "liberals heavily outweigh conservatives in US academia" for the statement that seems to cause you so much angst. It would make no difference to the arguments I would make defending a survey of university climate.

 

[Metaphor]

An article about conservative professors that freely uses the common language of liberals being on the left and conservatives being on the right.

How American Universities Discriminate Against Conservatives

Two scholars discuss the ups and downs of life as a right-leaning scholar.

www.theatlantic.com

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Two notions one must consider they are US constitutional restrictions on political speech and US constitutional restrictions on objective speech. Both are protected explicitly in

 Freedom of speech in the United States​

Florida's law blatantly violates professional and political speech freedoms.

Oh yes. How?

Compelling speech.

You seem to have had a problem with that elsewhere.

Nobody's speech is compelled. Nobody is forced to answer any questions. I fill out my annual employee survey every year and it would be insane to call my speech 'compelled'.

Are they Reich-wingers who imply you are probably a biased leftist and then pressure you to give personal political info? Do they threaten to not pay you if not enough of you and your biased leftist colleagues don't fill it out?

Do you think your rhetoric and your insinuations are conducive to constructive dialogue?

It could be, but your response utterly failed to address the relevant gaps in your survey analogy.

 

[laughing dog]

I have explained, more than once, why in the context of my statement and in the context for the evidence for my statement, liberals are part of the left. They are not the only people on the left. For example, there are also left-leaning centrists and the far left who are in the left.

There is no dispute that you have made a reactionary explanation.

I have, more than once than once. Read my posts or shut up.

You have not. Handwaving that something "vastly outweighs" is not showing work.

I know that liberals are not morons, and in both the context of the survey, and the wider context of American society, liberals are part of the left and conservatives are part of the right.

You don't know the US very well. Plenty of people think of themselves as classical "liberals" which is not left.

Irrelevant. The HERI survey is self-identification. And the HERI survey was not an analog scale. Any left-leaning or right-leaning centrist would choose the label that best fits them.

They would choose the label that they believe fits them but may differ from what you claim is "left" or "right".

I can show you the evidence. I can't understand it for you.

Given you have demonstrated you don't understand your own evidence, I would not expect you to understand it for anyone else.

EDIT: In any case, as I've said repeatedly, I can substitute the also-correct statement "liberals heavily outweigh conservatives in US academia" for the statement that seems to cause you so much angst. It would make no difference to the arguments I would make defending a survey of university climate.

You are sadly mistaken.

 

[laughing dog]

You haven't actually pointed out any reason it's a dumb analogy; name-calling is so much less effort, and probably more satisfying to you anyway. But as to how I came up with it, it was by way of JH's use of the loaded term "meddling".

Whether tax collection is "meddling" in any meaningful sense is if it is intended to alter decisions. The collection of a general sales tax is only "meddling" in a a trivial sense.

That word ... <snipped ad hom filled misrepresentation of a position in a different argument derail> ...

But your tacit admission that this is an attempt to meddle is fascinating.

"Admission"?!? You say that as though that were an issue in dispute and the circumstance that it's meddling weighs against my contention in this thread. Of course it's meddling; who the heck said it wasn't? My contention in this thread is that the Ziprhead/Salon contention that this survey bill will require people to register their views with the state is an out-to-lunch conspiracy theory. [/quote] Your posts make it appear that you view this attempt at "meddling" as a nothing burger.

<snipped babbling>..
Ah, it's nice to see you going back to playing "I'm rubber; you're glue." You're so good at it it's inspiring to watch...

Nice 2nd grade ad hom insult. I pointed out you made an evidence-free claim. I did not say anything about my claims or anyone elses' which means that not only did you trot out one of your many childish ad homs, you couldn't even use it correctly,

Instead of engaging in your usual childish and stupid ad homs, how about you show why “tmaybe, hey believe that there tenure committees are already demanding that candidate professors take partisan tests, and just want to get in on the game?” isn’t drivel?

 

[Metaphor]

I have explained, more than once, why in the context of my statement and in the context for the evidence for my statement, liberals are part of the left. They are not the only people on the left. For example, there are also left-leaning centrists and the far left who are in the left.

There is no dispute that you have made a reactionary explanation.

I dispute it, so your statement is false.

I have, more than once than once. Read my posts or shut up.

You have not. Handwaving that something "vastly outweighs" is not showing work.

I did not handwave it. I evidenced it. It appears you are now turning the locus of your petty semantics on the words 'vastly outweighs'.

I know that liberals are not morons, and in both the context of the survey, and the wider context of American society, liberals are part of the left and conservatives are part of the right.

You don't know the US very well. Plenty of people think of themselves as classical "liberals" which is not left.

I'm sure you have select people in your own circle who may think that and indeed wish it were true that 'liberal' was not associated with the left-right spectrum.

But it is. You are simply wrong.

Modern liberalism in the United States - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

As a group, "liberals" are referred to as left or center-left and "conservatives" as right or center-right.[6]

I can't help but notice that none of your fellow leftists are trying to defend your minority reading of the word 'liberal', or disputing that in the HERI survey it is indeed an indicator of being part of the left.

Irrelevant. The HERI survey is self-identification. And the HERI survey was not an analog scale. Any left-leaning or right-leaning centrist would choose the label that best fits them.

They would choose the label that they believe fits them but may differ from what you claim is "left" or "right".

I have already explained the HERI survey question and I have linked to it.

I have already explained how the word 'liberal' is associated with the left part of the left-right spectrum, specifically and especially in America.

I reject your unverified personal gnosis of the true meanings of the HERI respondents.