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

[ramoss]

Sheer nonsense. The ideas, beliefs and viewpoints that the Florida legislature is interested in and where one chooses to express (or censor) are going to be along political, ideological or religious lines.

University X has 1,000 students. 300 students express that they are uncomfortable with expressing their political views on campus. You don't know anything else about those students because you didn't collect anything about the political or ideological views of those students.

Has there ever been a time when certain political views were not frowned upon?

No. That isn't the point.

Do you think it is proper for taxpayers to fund institutions of learning where students who lean to one major political party feel less welcome (or indeed, are subject to policies designed to make them feel less welcome) than students who lean to the other major political party?

The problem is that when it comes to political views, particularly in the south, one party discourages education much more than others.

 

[Metaphor]

Sheer nonsense. The ideas, beliefs and viewpoints that the Florida legislature is interested in and where one chooses to express (or censor) are going to be along political, ideological or religious lines.

University X has 1,000 students. 300 students express that they are uncomfortable with expressing their political views on campus. You don't know anything else about those students because you didn't collect anything about the political or ideological views of those students.

Has there ever been a time when certain political views were not frowned upon?

No. That isn't the point.

Do you think it is proper for taxpayers to fund institutions of learning where students who lean to one major political party feel less welcome (or indeed, are subject to policies designed to make them feel less welcome) than students who lean to the other major political party?

The problem is that when it comes to political views, particularly in the south, one party discourages education much more than others.

There is not necessarily a problem that the people on campus disproportionately (compared to the US population) lean to one party over another. A problem would be if a campus is more hostile to people of one particular leaning compared to another.

 

[fromderinside]

Can you explain what those ‘good reasons’ to investigate university culture along political lines? What might those reasons be?

Yes, I certainly can, and I don't even need to use my imagination.

Posts mischaracterize Florida law on college campus surveys

AP’S ASSESSMENT: False.

apnews.com

(note that this bill is a year old and news of it was revived)

EDIT 2: Even salon.com--salon.com for god's sake--revised its false headline that the bill requires people to 'register' their political view with the state, because that characterisation is so egregiously false.

The bill requires the State Board of Education and The Board of Governors to create a survey to be administered annually by the 28 schools comprising the Florida College System and the 12 public universities included in the State University System that “considers the extent to which competing ideas and perspectives are presented” and how free members of the college communities feel “to express their beliefs and viewpoints.”

So, for example, there is already evidence that conservative students self-censor their views more than liberal students. But, the only way to know if this is a problem in the Florida system is to survey the Florida system.

Are Colleges and Universities Too Liberal? What the Research Says About the Political Composition of Campuses and Campus Climate

“Is Academe Awash in Liberal Bias?” This is one of many recent headlines trying to grapple with a question that we’ve been debating for decades: are colleges and universities dominated by liberals? Over the past few years, charges that colleges and universities are “about Radical Left...

www.aei.org

The Knight Foundation’s 2019 survey of over 4,400 undergraduates on the state of collegiate student expression shed more light on these troubling trends: 68% felt silenced because “their campus climate precludes students from expressing their true opinions because their classmates might find them offensive.”


And most recently the aforementioned FIRE free speech survey of almost 20,000 college students confirmed that self-censorship on campuses is prevalent: Six out of ten college students say they have kept quiet due to fear of how others would respond. Breaking this down further, the largest group on campus which self-censors is “strong Republicans” (73%) and the lowest is “strong Democrats” (52%). These findings are in many ways a continuation and deepening of trends from 2016 and 2017 when conservative students reported self-censoring more than their liberal counterparts.


Student willingness to use violence and engage in behavior to explicitly stop speech is another area where the FIRE report uncovers disturbing trends. Those identifying as extremely liberal said violence to stop a speech or event from occurring on campus was “always” or “sometimes” acceptable at a rate double than of students identifying as extremely conservative: 13% to 6%. More than a quarter of extremely liberal respondents said it is “rarely” acceptable, compared to 8% of extremely conservative respondents.


One of the most interesting findings in terms of political bias in the FIRE report comes from comparing conservative student ratings of institutions with liberal student ratings. What emerged is that even when conservatives rank a predominantly liberal institution highly in terms of being open to speech, they find themselves self-censoring. University of Chicago was ranked highly by both Liberals (1st) and Conservatives (3rd). Overall less than half of the students report self-censoring (44%). But when broken down by political leaning 82% of Conservatives report holding back their views compared to 53% of Moderates and 40% of Liberals. As one student at Chicago noted: “[I am] afraid to disagree with certain liberal talking points because even if I do not agree with the conservative side either I feel like I will be rejected for not being ‘woke’ enough.”

Beyond self-censorship, in class and in coursework, I would also say that the administration may impose requirements on to students that reflect the political beliefs of the administration.

I assume most people would be aghast if a public university decided to send all students a weekly Christian devotional. Yet universities think nothing of making compulsory courses unrelated to the student's study, courses about white privilege and microaggressions, for example. Some universities withhold your results until you complete such courses.

EDIT: At my current university, there are two short courses, in addition to what I'm actually studying, that I was required to take. An academic plagiarism course (which is fair, that is relevant to whatever you are studying) and a course about consent, illustrated with a range of differently-coloured and sexually-orientated cartoon characters, built on the idea that some rapists don't know when they're raping people, and a consent course will change their minds about raping people.

Note: it is my understanding that universities in the US enjoy greater academic freedom
compared with Australian universities. Indeed, academic freedom, to go where the research/data/evidence leads you is a primary value in US universities. Or public ones anyway.

I'm sure you believe that, but it isn't true. Try being a psychologist who examines the relationship between ethnicity and IQ.

I received a PhD at a public Florida University, Florida State University, in the field of psychology. There the student population and faculty populations were both quite conservative compared to where I received undergraduate training, California and Washington.

The populations at FSU we quite in tune with - conservative as He'cuns - those of the citizens around Tallahassee. Yet Streaking originated there while I was a student at Burt Reynolds U.

I published there with no obvious pressure to espouse local sentiments even though several faculty taught as if Scarlett O'Hara were the target student.

Now the legislature still acts as if they were elected in Leon County, the place where Florida parents of stature send their daughters to be trained. Yeah, I know Streaking.

The point is the bias in red clay Florida is as different as the characterization of Florida as the place of sun, fun, powerful boats, white sands and Miami Vice. The legislature, haters of anything Dade county save Cuban refugees, managed to leave out whether the opinions needed to be signed, and they will be so required, bet my bippy.

Just dropped this note to make the point that what kids and faculty think is far distant from what legal and ethical practices be. Checkout Jimmy Kimmel interviews at that mall in Burbank near the ABC studio reveals.

Vox Populi and all that.

 

[Bomb#20]

Has there ever been a time when certain political views were not frowned upon?

"I know no country in which there is so little true independence of mind and freedom of discussion as in America. In any constitutional state in Europe every sort of religious and political theory may be advocated and propagated abroad; for there is no country in Europe so subdued by any single authority as not to contain citizens who are ready to protect the man who raises his voice in the cause of truth from the consequences of his hardihood. ... In America the majority raises very formidable barriers to the liberty of opinion: within these barriers an author may write whatever he pleases, but he will repent it if he ever step beyond them. ... Before he published his opinions he imagined that he held them in common with many others; but no sooner has he declared them openly than he is loudly censured by his overbearing opponents, whilst those who think without having the courage to speak, like him, abandon him in silence. He yields at length, oppressed by the daily efforts he has been making, and he subsides into silence, as if he was tormented by remorse for having spoken the truth." - Alexis De Tocqueville, 1835

 

[ZiprHead]

Sheer nonsense. The ideas, beliefs and viewpoints that the Florida legislature is interested in and where one chooses to express (or censor) are going to be along political, ideological or religious lines.

University X has 1,000 students. 300 students express that they are uncomfortable with expressing their political views on campus. You don't know anything else about those students because you didn't collect anything about the political or ideological views of those students.

Has there ever been a time when certain political views were not frowned upon?

No. That isn't the point.

Do you think it is proper for taxpayers to fund institutions of learning where students who lean to one major political party feel less welcome (or indeed, are subject to policies designed to make them feel less welcome) than students who lean to the other major political party?

The problem is that when it comes to political views, particularly in the south, one party discourages education much more than others.

There is not necessarily a problem that the people on campus disproportionately (compared to the US population) lean to one party over another. A problem would be if a campus is more hostile to people of one particular leaning compared to another.

How does this survey address that?

 

[laughing dog]

Funding should not be dependent on the political and religious views of staff or students, but it should be dependent on the university creating a climate that is fair to all taxpayers.

Which does not require asking about the religious, political and ideological views or leanings of the staff and students.

In the US, there are campuses that send out “campus climate” surveys that are an attempt to measure the openness to diverse ideas and people (among other things). These surveys do not typically ask about the religious or political views of the respondents. I know this because my campus conducts such a survey without those type of unnecessary questions.

This is not about insuring diversity of viewpoints by opening up discussion - it is a thinly veiled attempt to limiting dissent and opposing viewpoints.
There is a clear record of their intent to stifle content in the public schools in Florida. The Gov. Desantis is trying to punish a corporation (Disney) for disagreeing with one of his policies. And Republican legislators throughout the US are promoting laws that either restrict the ability to protest (i.e. disagree with their views) or loosen the liability for those who harm protesters during a protest (e.g. run over people blocking a street).

 

[Ford]

Funding should not be dependent on the political and religious views of staff or students, but it should be dependent on the university creating a climate that is fair to all taxpayers.

Which does not require asking about the religious, political and ideological views or leanings of the staff and students.

In the US, there are campuses that send out “campus climate” surveys that are an attempt to measure the openness to diverse ideas and people (among other things). These surveys do not typically ask about the religious or political views of the respondents. I know this because my campus conducts such a survey without those type of unnecessary questions.

This is not about insuring diversity of viewpoints by opening up discussion - it is a thinly veiled attempt to limiting dissent and opposing viewpoints.

Ah, but you see...according to Metaphor it is an indisputable fact that universities are all hotbeds of liberal (or even socialist and communist) indoctrination where the few conservative professors and staff cower in their offices fearing retribution for teaching anything other than "woke" Marxism and gender fluidity. If we don't do something to stop it, an entire generation of students will come out of college with a degree and neutral pronouns. Won't you think of the children?

 

[Jarhyn]

Funding should not be dependent on the political and religious views of staff or students, but it should be dependent on the university creating a climate that is fair to all taxpayers.

Which does not require asking about the religious, political and ideological views or leanings of the staff and students.

In the US, there are campuses that send out “campus climate” surveys that are an attempt to measure the openness to diverse ideas and people (among other things). These surveys do not typically ask about the religious or political views of the respondents. I know this because my campus conducts such a survey without those type of unnecessary questions.

This is not about insuring diversity of viewpoints by opening up discussion - it is a thinly veiled attempt to limiting dissent and opposing viewpoints.

Ah, but you see...according to Metaphor it is an indisputable fact that universities are all hotbeds of liberal (or even socialist and communist) indoctrination where the few conservative professors and staff cower in their offices fearing retribution for teaching anything other than "woke" Marxism and gender fluidity. If we don't do something to stop it, an entire generation of students will come out of college with a degree and neutral pronouns. Won't you think of the children?

I don't think it's all self-selection.

I would eject anyone from a department who makes arguments such as theirs that "is" of their dubiously definite "sex" informs any kind of "ought" might not have the wherewithal to hack it in academia in the first place.

There is the unfortunate reality: that some folks are completely and utterly immune to seeing their own shittiness, and these folks will always seek to impose this thing they do not understand as shittiness on others, and it is this imposition that makes it particularly shitty.

Sometimes this shittiness is a failure to apply reason in all things relating directly to one's job, such as preaching badly reasoned discussions of material unrelated to the course.

I expect that reasoning like Metaphor's doesn't live long and even reasoning like Angra Mainu or Sargon of Akkad's gets spotted before too long. As such the vague liberal bias of reality itself is going to win out and cause a bias.

But that bias is a function of reality asserting itself against a group where one side says "I am right and have always been", and the other side says "we are all wrong let's work towards fixing that."

You have to step out of the cave to be welcome in academia.

We are stuck with a cave-man problem. No offense to reasonable people who happen to live in caves. I'm talking about Plato's Cave.

 

[Bomb#20]

And? I'm not the one who called it a nothingburger. If you object to the contention that it's a nothingburger, take it up with Don.

https://iidb.org/threads/desantis-s...al-views-with-state.26299/page-2#post-1026416

And if you object to the contention that it's a nothingburger, why did you "Like" his post?

His post was ironic.

If you think that means the author doesn't mean what he says, you have a superficial understanding of irony. The irony lies in the circumstance that this bill is a nothingburger even though the conservatives would like it to be a somethingburger, because they lack the skill set and the understanding it would take in order to put whatever data they extract to effective use for nefarious purposes.

As for whether what I actually wrote was drivel, what did you have in mind? To satisfy your skepticism do I need to send a survey to every Republican in the Florida legislature to find out if, contrary to all your sincerest expectations, they actually agree with what has long been conventional wisdom among conservatives? Here's a typical example...

Yes, Universities Discriminate Against Conservatives

Would you also like me to present a peer-reviewed study to back up the contention that YECs think Darwinism is atheistic?

Wading past the usual sarcasm and snottiness, thank you for providing the basis for your drivel. Unfortunately, your basis is drivel as well which is why I gave your response a thumbs up for intellectual consistency.

Okay, I can't tell if you're being abusive just for the sake of being abusive, so I have to ask. Do you actually, seriously, sincerely believe that the Florida Republican legislators think tenure committees don't discriminate against conservatives?

 

[marc]

Survey question: Are your views being suppressed?

response: Yes! My beliefs in biblical literalism/creation are not being covered or taken seriously in the biology, history, and geology departments!

survey conclusion: liberal elites are suppressing conservative values/voices!

 

[laughing dog]

Okay, I can't tell if you're being abusive just for the sake of being abusive, so I have to ask.

Just using rhetoric that you employ and understand.

Do you actually, seriously, sincerely believe that the Florida Republican legislators think tenure committees don't discriminate against conservatives?

I wouldn’t be surprised if those yahoos believed such drivel.

 

[Metaphor]

Sheer nonsense. The ideas, beliefs and viewpoints that the Florida legislature is interested in and where one chooses to express (or censor) are going to be along political, ideological or religious lines.

University X has 1,000 students. 300 students express that they are uncomfortable with expressing their political views on campus. You don't know anything else about those students because you didn't collect anything about the political or ideological views of those students.

Has there ever been a time when certain political views were not frowned upon?

No. That isn't the point.

Do you think it is proper for taxpayers to fund institutions of learning where students who lean to one major political party feel less welcome (or indeed, are subject to policies designed to make them feel less welcome) than students who lean to the other major political party?

The problem is that when it comes to political views, particularly in the south, one party discourages education much more than others.

There is not necessarily a problem that the people on campus disproportionately (compared to the US population) lean to one party over another. A problem would be if a campus is more hostile to people of one particular leaning compared to another.

How does this survey address that?

If laughing dog had his way, it wouldn't address it, because he would remove questions pertaining to political leaning.

However, the survey addresses it by discovering if there may be a problem by discovering if attitudes and perceptions of campus climate differ by self-described political leaning.

 

[Metaphor]

Funding should not be dependent on the political and religious views of staff or students, but it should be dependent on the university creating a climate that is fair to all taxpayers.

Which does not require asking about the religious, political and ideological views or leanings of the staff and students.

In the US, there are campuses that send out “campus climate” surveys that are an attempt to measure the openness to diverse ideas and people (among other things). These surveys do not typically ask about the religious or political views of the respondents. I know this because my campus conducts such a survey without those type of unnecessary questions.

This is not about insuring diversity of viewpoints by opening up discussion - it is a thinly veiled attempt to limiting dissent and opposing viewpoints.

Ah, but you see...according to Metaphor it is an indisputable fact that universities are all hotbeds of liberal (or even socialist and communist) indoctrination

This is an outright falsehood about what I believe, a falsehood you have promulgated despite my explicit words to the contrary.

 

[Metaphor]

Funding should not be dependent on the political and religious views of staff or students, but it should be dependent on the university creating a climate that is fair to all taxpayers.

Which does not require asking about the religious, political and ideological views or leanings of the staff and students.

In the US, there are campuses that send out “campus climate” surveys that are an attempt to measure the openness to diverse ideas and people (among other things). These surveys do not typically ask about the religious or political views of the respondents. I know this because my campus conducts such a survey without those type of unnecessary questions.

This is not about insuring diversity of viewpoints by opening up discussion - it is a thinly veiled attempt to limiting dissent and opposing viewpoints.

Ah, but you see...according to Metaphor it is an indisputable fact that universities are all hotbeds of liberal (or even socialist and communist) indoctrination where the few conservative professors and staff cower in their offices fearing retribution for teaching anything other than "woke" Marxism and gender fluidity. If we don't do something to stop it, an entire generation of students will come out of college with a degree and neutral pronouns. Won't you think of the children?

I don't think it's all self-selection.

I would eject anyone from a department who makes arguments such as theirs that "is" of their dubiously definite "sex" informs any kind of "ought" might not have the wherewithal to hack it in academia in the first place.

I do not doubt you would exercise power as any authoritarian would if you had the chance, but I do not derive 'oughts' from 'is' with regards to sex and gender so your statement is false.

 

[Metaphor]

Funding should not be dependent on the political and religious views of staff or students, but it should be dependent on the university creating a climate that is fair to all taxpayers.

Which does not require asking about the religious, political and ideological views or leanings of the staff and students.

In the US, there are campuses that send out “campus climate” surveys that are an attempt to measure the openness to diverse ideas and people (among other things). These surveys do not typically ask about the religious or political views of the respondents. I know this because my campus conducts such a survey without those type of unnecessary questions.

They're necessary if you actually want to discover nuanced truths. A campus climate that the majority are happy with, but select subgroups are very unhappy with would be something you would not discover unless you asked your allegedly 'unnecessary questions'.

If a survey discovered that 15% of people felt unsafe on campus at night, you might think 'that's a low enough number to not worry about'. But of course, surveys usually collect self-reported sex and/or gender, and you might discover that although 5 per cent of males feel unsafe, 25 per cent of females feel unsafe. What you do with that information is up to you, but at least you have the information.

This is not about insuring diversity of viewpoints by opening up discussion - it is a thinly veiled attempt to limiting dissent and opposing viewpoints.
There is a clear record of their intent to stifle content in the public schools in Florida. The Gov. Desantis is trying to punish a corporation (Disney) for disagreeing with one of his policies. And Republican legislators throughout the US are promoting laws that either restrict the ability to protest (i.e. disagree with their views) or loosen the liability for those who harm protesters during a protest (e.g. run over people blocking a street).

Your opinions about DeSantis and his administration are irrelevant. If the annual survey discovers a problem with taxpayer funded campuses, then that problem can be addressed. If the surveys discover no such problem, then even better.

 

[laughing dog]

They're necessary if you actually want to discover nuanced truths. A campus climate that the majority are happy with, but select subgroups are very unhappy with would be something you would not discover unless you asked your allegedly 'unnecessary questions'.

What “ nuanced truths” are you babbling about?
If viewpoints are suppressed, the religion or ideology or political leanings of the suppressors are irrelevant in dealing with it.

Your opinions about DeSantis and his administration are irrelevant. If the annual survey discovers a problem with taxpayer funded campuses, then that problem can be addressed. If the surveys discover no such problem, then even better.

I have a bridge for sale that you can have cheap.

 

[Metaphor]

They're necessary if you actually want to discover nuanced truths. A campus climate that the majority are happy with, but select subgroups are very unhappy with would be something you would not discover unless you asked your allegedly 'unnecessary questions'.

What “ nuanced truths” are you babbling about?

I wrote it out rather clearly for you, and you've even quoted it and yet you respond with your typical venom.

What is true of the whole is not necessarily true of the parts. The campus climate can be comfortable for the majority, but be negative for certain subgroups. When those subgroups are along political lines, in a taxpayer-funded campus, that is a problem.

If viewpoints are suppressed, the religion or ideology or political leanings of the suppressors are irrelevant in dealing with it.

They are entirely relevant. What is true of the whole is not necessarily true of the parts. But not just the political leanings of the 'suppressors' are relevant, but the political leanings also of the suppressed.

Your opinions about DeSantis and his administration are irrelevant. If the annual survey discovers a problem with taxpayer funded campuses, then that problem can be addressed. If the surveys discover no such problem, then even better.

I have a bridge for sale that you can have cheap.

laughing dog, you have treated me with such hostility I wouldn't accept a cup of coffee from you.

 

[laughing dog]

I wrote it out rather clearly for you, and you've even quoted it and yet you respond with your typical venom.

Oh honey, you don't know venom. Grow up.

What is true of the whole is not necessarily true of the parts. The campus climate can be comfortable for the majority, but be negative for certain subgroups. When those subgroups are along political lines, in a taxpayer-funded campus, that is a problem.

That is an obvious truth.. What is also obvious is that the religious, political and ideological viewpoints of the staff and students is unnecessary to deal with problem. Suppression or hostility towards view points is a problem of personalities not ideology, religion or politics. If some faculty are suppressing viewpoints of students or creating a hostile intellectual environment, the issue is not religious, political or ideology of the faculty but their behavior.

laughing dog, you have treated me with such hostility I wouldn't accept a cup of coffee from you.

You reap what you sow.

 

[Metaphor]

I wrote it out rather clearly for you, and you've even quoted it and yet you respond with your typical venom.

Oh honey, you don't know venom. Grow up.

What is true of the whole is not necessarily true of the parts. The campus climate can be comfortable for the majority, but be negative for certain subgroups. When those subgroups are along political lines, in a taxpayer-funded campus, that is a problem.

That is an obvious truth.. What is also obvious is that the religious, political and ideological viewpoints of the staff and students is unnecessary to deal with problem. Suppression or hostility towards view points is a problem of personalities not ideology, religion or politics. If some faculty are suppressing viewpoints of students or creating a hostile intellectual environment, the issue is not religious, political or ideology of the faculty but their behavior.

laughing dog, you have treated me with such hostility I wouldn't accept a cup of coffee from you.

You reap what you sow.

 

[Ford]

Funding should not be dependent on the political and religious views of staff or students, but it should be dependent on the university creating a climate that is fair to all taxpayers.

Which does not require asking about the religious, political and ideological views or leanings of the staff and students.

In the US, there are campuses that send out “campus climate” surveys that are an attempt to measure the openness to diverse ideas and people (among other things). These surveys do not typically ask about the religious or political views of the respondents. I know this because my campus conducts such a survey without those type of unnecessary questions.

This is not about insuring diversity of viewpoints by opening up discussion - it is a thinly veiled attempt to limiting dissent and opposing viewpoints.

Ah, but you see...according to Metaphor it is an indisputable fact that universities are all hotbeds of liberal (or even socialist and communist) indoctrination

This is an outright falsehood about what I believe, a falsehood you have promulgated despite my explicit words to the contrary.

There's a lot of falsehoods being bandied about in Florida right now. Like the Governor's continued insistence that this law is an unbiased, completely innocent attempt to encourage the free exchange of ideas on campuses and totally not a way to threaten universities to stop being so "radically leftist." Or the lie that the "Don't Say Gay" law is anything but an attempt to shove LGBTQ folks back in the closet and that they have no intention of targeting teachers who are in same sex relationships or trans kids. Recently we just saw another blatant lie pass by that "Republicans want nothing more than for abortion to be left completely up to the states and that we have no intention of going any further once Roe is overturned." Coming soon...new legal challenges to same sex marriage, contraception, and anything else they can get this right wing court to shove down our throats. They're already putting prayer back into schools.

I was using hyperbole, by the way, to mock you. Guess you missed that, but anyway...if I misrepresented your position so egregiously in doing so, and you really are opposed to all that, then why pray tell are you spending so much time defending the Florida law? You've already stated - in "repeat a lie often enough" fashion - that you believe it is an indisputable fact that universities are overwhelmingly left-wing and there is no evidence to the contrary. Perhaps you could answer that and then take your righteous indignation down to Florida and put it on a t-shirt to wear to a DeSantis rally....