In the students' defence, they are going to a Midwestern liberal arts school. Does it really matter if they pass or fail? I don't think that McDonalds really gives a shit whether or not their burger flippers have a degree or not.
-
Features
Forming a Student Movement against Censorship on Campuses
- Thread starter chaas
- Start date
untermensche
Contributor
Yes they are stuck in a capitalist rat race with very little opportunity.
Derec
Contributor
Yeah, they should take a float to Cuba or Venezuela, the worker and peasant paradises with unlimited opportunity.
untermensche
Contributor
If those places and everywhere in the Western hemisphere had been left in peace instead of attacked every time they tried to make economic experiments not permitted by the US master we might know what those experiments were capable of.
Sure the capitalist hell hole of the USofA is making the whole hemisphere a garbage dump with it's continual violence and support of violence and oppression.
That's the idea. Eliminate or disrupt with force any alternative.
ronburgundy
Contributor
I agree, but why doesn't that apply equally to a speaker. If they want audience input, that's fine, otherwise, shut the fuck up.
If its okay for hecklers to prevent speech by heckling, why isn't it okay for students to prevent a teacher from teaching by chanting "We don't want no worse the "C", down with objectivity!"
The typical defense of hecklers that they are just "speaking their mind" is dishonest bullshit. They are preventing others from speaking and using their voice as a weapon of censorship. They could speak anyplace else of just another time in that same place, but don't because it has nothing to do with their own speech but with preventing others from speaking. The principle of free speech is so important (and was recognized as such by the founders) precisely because a free exchange of competing ideas is presumed to be healthy for all forms of progress. Heckling completely undermines this principle, and makes it so no ideas are able to be exchanged.
There is no difference between effectively shutting down a speaker via heckling, and shutting down a classroom by preventing the teacher from communicating to the students. Both are bad and anti free-speech.
Jimmy Higgins
Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2001
- Messages
- 50,524
- Basic Beliefs
- Calvinistic Atheist
There is definitely a forum to protest a speaker, though that doesn't seem to be getting used in some cases. Honestly, we haven't been able to stop the craziness since Kanye West opened Pandora's Box.
- - - Updated - - -
Umm... they are the one's getting the useless or diluted degrees. I'd have loved to major in history.
Sarpedon
Veteran Member
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2002
- Messages
- 2,976
- Location
- MN, US
- Basic Beliefs
- the Philosophy of Not Giving a Damn
Suppose you lived in an apartment complex, paying a high rent. Suppose this apartment complex had a party room one could rent. Suppose someone rented this room, and threw a party for Neo-Nazis in it, bringing them in close proximity to you and your family, and bringing all kinds of negative attention. Would you have the right to complain to the management?
As always, any right wing butthurt complaint against something supposedly liberal can be neutralized by following the money and rewriting the whole thing in market terms. College students pay huge amounts to go to college. At the end, they receive a piece of paper that says that they are a better person to hire, because they went to that college. They have a definite, monetary interest in how the college is run, and its reputation, which they pay for amply. And yet somehow, they don't have any say in how the college is run.
One of the favorite lies of the right wing is that college students are somehow lazy parasites, instead of people who are paying an awful lot of money to be where they are.
As always, any right wing butthurt complaint against something supposedly liberal can be neutralized by following the money and rewriting the whole thing in market terms. College students pay huge amounts to go to college. At the end, they receive a piece of paper that says that they are a better person to hire, because they went to that college. They have a definite, monetary interest in how the college is run, and its reputation, which they pay for amply. And yet somehow, they don't have any say in how the college is run.
One of the favorite lies of the right wing is that college students are somehow lazy parasites, instead of people who are paying an awful lot of money to be where they are.
Jimmy Higgins
Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2001
- Messages
- 50,524
- Basic Beliefs
- Calvinistic Atheist
So anyway, I spend a lot of money to my cardiologist...
From a different angle, people get to typically choose what school they go to. If they are looking for a particular curriculum, they do that before putting down the big cash money wad on a particular school.
That's nothing. They say colleges are liberal making mills, yet every Republican in Congress graduated from college.
Well, sure, if you are the sort of person who believes in free speech and free association you would support the right of people to protest and boycott pretty much anyone for anything.
But if you're the sort of person that thinks bakeries that bake cakes should be forced to bake gay wedding cakes you'd probably take the view that if the apartment complex holds its rooms out for rent to parties it can't discriminate based on the ideology of the partiers.
Additional issues come into play with universities that take federal money as courts have held they count as government entities and government entities are not legally allowed to engage in viewpoint discrimination.
ronburgundy
Contributor
Nothing would more deservingly hurt the reputation of a college than to censor speakers for their political views. It goes against every principle that University education is supposed to be about. Such schools should be viewed by all employers as places where students learn very little, because the students are entitled cowards who refuse to allow anything to be said near them that they don't already agree with. They are equal to fundamentalist churches in only allowing reinforcement of accepted dogma.
These students are not being forced to listen to anything. Their sole concern is trying to force others not to listen. They are doing the equivalent of someone who stands in front of a twinkie display at the supermarket to prevent other shoppers from accessing the twinkies, because they personally don't like twinkies.
They can voice their opinion all they want without preventing others from voicing theirs. They can also switch schools, which is akin to switching to a market that doesn't sell twinkies. But if other customers at that store want twinkies or other students at the school want to hear a speaker, it is grossly immoral, anti-liberty, and anti-free speech to block their access to it.
Actual liberals understand this and are strongly against the neo-fascist leftist movement growing on college campuses.
They understand that these "safe-spacers" are identical to the right-wing fascists of the past who used the same (they are dangerous) fear tactics to stifle liberal voices in the civil rights movement, including on campuses.
Sarpedon
Veteran Member
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2002
- Messages
- 2,976
- Location
- MN, US
- Basic Beliefs
- the Philosophy of Not Giving a Damn
Truth now, who is bringing these speakers in? Who is paying the freight? Is it the students, or is it some outside right wing think tank or PAC? If we follow the money, where would it lead? Why wouldn't one want their campus to be free from outside money from anonymous sources spreading disinformation. Say whatever you like, these PACs can keep their funding sources absolutely secret. There might be one or more that are run by the FSB for all we know. That is scary to anyone who doesn't believe that money is the ultimate good.
Have you any idea how much money it costs to switch schools? Credits cost money, and credits are often non-transferrable. Also, I note that your whole 'they can go elsewhere' can also be applied to your side. You can go elsewhere and have your speech. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
And who says they want to block other people's access to it? Tickets to Washington DC cost money. If one wants to protest a particular viewpoint, isn't it much more convenient to let them come to you, so you can protest them, then have to go fuck all to Washington? Personally, I think the people who would block all access are doing themselves a disservice, but it would seem that they are in a minority. Again, republicans are taking the most extreme minority and claiming they are the majority.
Finally, I don't think the idea that colleges should be open to 'any' idea. As alluded to above about the outside, hidden money, is that ANYONE can pay someone to say ANYTHING. As an institution of learning, the college has an interest in not having lies taught at their campus. What are some examples of outright lies that the right wing teaches? That there is no such thing as global warming, that abortions are hazardous, that cutting taxes on the rich is good for the economy, that homosexuality is a choice, that genders can't change, that cigarrettes don't cause lung cancer, that the Civil War was about States Rights, not about slavery, and so on and so on. Whine and complain until your face turns purple, but these are LIES and teaching them is FRAUD. The whole idea that 'all ideas are equal' and deserve equal time is garbage. A lie is not equal to the truth, and institutions of learning should not waste the money that students pay them to give 'equal access' to ideas that have been proven to be false and are peddled by fraudulent politicians. Students pay for an education, not to be lied to.
Have you any idea how much money it costs to switch schools? Credits cost money, and credits are often non-transferrable. Also, I note that your whole 'they can go elsewhere' can also be applied to your side. You can go elsewhere and have your speech. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
And who says they want to block other people's access to it? Tickets to Washington DC cost money. If one wants to protest a particular viewpoint, isn't it much more convenient to let them come to you, so you can protest them, then have to go fuck all to Washington? Personally, I think the people who would block all access are doing themselves a disservice, but it would seem that they are in a minority. Again, republicans are taking the most extreme minority and claiming they are the majority.
Finally, I don't think the idea that colleges should be open to 'any' idea. As alluded to above about the outside, hidden money, is that ANYONE can pay someone to say ANYTHING. As an institution of learning, the college has an interest in not having lies taught at their campus. What are some examples of outright lies that the right wing teaches? That there is no such thing as global warming, that abortions are hazardous, that cutting taxes on the rich is good for the economy, that homosexuality is a choice, that genders can't change, that cigarrettes don't cause lung cancer, that the Civil War was about States Rights, not about slavery, and so on and so on. Whine and complain until your face turns purple, but these are LIES and teaching them is FRAUD. The whole idea that 'all ideas are equal' and deserve equal time is garbage. A lie is not equal to the truth, and institutions of learning should not waste the money that students pay them to give 'equal access' to ideas that have been proven to be false and are peddled by fraudulent politicians. Students pay for an education, not to be lied to.
Derec
Contributor
Yes, the bottom line is, you think they should be open to left-wing ideas only. So when left-wing black radicals storm the stage and shut down a conservative speaker and the campus security does nothing, you're fine with it.
But imagine if conservative protesters tried to shut down a left-wing speaker, you'd be crying "fascism".
laughing dog
Contributor
When did you start to believe you could read other people's minds?
Derec
Contributor
Not much reading minds required. All his talk about how "right wing lies" should not be allowed is not fooling anybody, to borrow your favorite phrase.
Sarpedon
Veteran Member
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2002
- Messages
- 2,976
- Location
- MN, US
- Basic Beliefs
- the Philosophy of Not Giving a Damn
I don't usually respond to Derec, but I will in this case:
If a conservative group was going to try to shut down a left winger espousing some sort of lie similar to global warming denialism, like, say 'vaccines cause autism,' or 'GMO foods are dangerous,' I'd agree with them. That is the difference. Lies are lies. The difference is that conservative groups peddling lies are more common, because there's more money in opposing regulations by denying climate change than there is in opposing vaccinations. Again, simple. Follow the money.
If a conservative group was going to try to shut down a left winger espousing some sort of lie similar to global warming denialism, like, say 'vaccines cause autism,' or 'GMO foods are dangerous,' I'd agree with them. That is the difference. Lies are lies. The difference is that conservative groups peddling lies are more common, because there's more money in opposing regulations by denying climate change than there is in opposing vaccinations. Again, simple. Follow the money.
laughing dog
Contributor
Yes it does,
Since you seem to believe there "left wing" lies, I find it hard to believe you do not acknowledge there are "right wing lies"?
It's still not reasonable.
J842P
Veteran Member
This is nonsense. Having a speaker at a campus is not the same thing as instruction.
A University should welcome, for example, having YEC come and speak at a college if a student group invited them. Indeed, the group who invited the speaker need not sympathize with them! If some conservative group invites an global-warming skeptic, then surely they should be allowed to speak, and the relevant experts would hopefully be chomping at the bit to engage them. It belies a lack of confidence in your arguments if you wish to silence even the snake-oil salesmen. Sunshine is the best medicine. Tuition doesn't generally go to these sorts of speakers anyway, but they are brought in by groups on campus. This is a good thing.
whichphilosophy
Contributor
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2004
- Messages
- 6,803
- Basic Beliefs
- Energy is itself a Life form
It seems to be a US term but where even some US students are not aware of this term. Certainly outside of the US I have not seen this used in the UK, UAE or Philippines.
I checked this informal website giving views
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2840769
Troll_Whisperer 1758 days ago
I googled "rising senior" and got under a million results. Even more telling, the very first result was title "What is a rising senior?"
It's also worth pointing out that I'm US born and bred, spent 7 years at universities and was unfamiliar with the term. It sounded pretentious to me.
aorshan 1758 days ago
I've heard that and used it hundreds of times. It is a completely normal expression on college campuses.
I can't find this term in any dictionaries including slang ones. In my own view it is simply a form of intellectual masturbation or verbal titillation to on something that is meaningless.
laughing dog
Contributor
Campus groups tend to get their funds from the university/college either from the general fund (which is funded, in part, by tuition) or from student/student union fees (which are an add-on to tuition). In essence, institutions of higher learning usually (but not always) fund speakers invited by campus groups.