It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Conservatives are the real campus thought police squashing academic freedom

page: 8
88
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 10 2017 @ 02:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
Last I knew, protesting ,with the proper paperwork, is legal; and sending a death threat is not. I do not see any parallel.

Well it happens and is one of the issues I'm trying to highlight in this OP. So I take it you are on my side and disagree with it then? Even when conservatives do it to liberals?


You still haven't answered the question about universities that accept tax dollars not being allowed to censor free speech.

I feel like it should be up to the students. They are the ones who will receive the content. There is no point in a university, public or private, to book a conservative speaker at a primarily liberal school. Or vice-versa. That is just looking for trouble.
edit on 10-10-2017 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 10 2017 @ 02:38 PM
link   
The paramount argument here from "the right" has been "Yeah, well you guys did it first."

... and that kindergarten crap is the best that we've seen here.

The OP is very specific in its claim. It is obvious, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that those "on the right" seek to intimidate and silence those "on the left" by the use of terroristic threats. Those threats were documented along with all the evidence needed to support the argument: yes, conservatives do act as "thought police" as surely as any liberal.

Well done, OP.



posted on Oct, 10 2017 @ 02:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: ketsuko

Thanks for continuing an argument that began and ended on page 1. Nothing like re dredging up Offtopic bull# to refrain from discussing the OP. Thanks ketsuko, keep reaching for that low fruit!


Well you know, we can't all spend all day posting. Some of us have other commitments.

But hey, don't address the point and insult the poster. That certainly makes your argument water-tight!



posted on Oct, 10 2017 @ 02:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

My first problem with the material quoted by the OP is that the editorial writer is coming from the position that their words are not in any way inflammatory.

And yet they are.

They are from a position of racist/misandrist thought. "“It’s the white supremacist patriarchy, stupid,”

Did the poster not expected to get blasted for that anymore than someone who tweets about Muslims should expect to take flak if they pop it up right after an incident?

She can't just assume that her so-called scholarship in feminism studies and CRT makes her automatically reasonable to the wider world.
edit on 10-10-2017 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 10 2017 @ 02:42 PM
link   
Of course public universities can establish codes for behavior and on-campus assemblies.

To suggest otherwise is absurd.



posted on Oct, 10 2017 @ 02:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: ketsuko

Thanks for continuing an argument that began and ended on page 1. Nothing like re dredging up Offtopic bull# to refrain from discussing the OP. Thanks ketsuko, keep reaching for that low fruit!


Well you know, we can't all spend all day posting. Some of us have other commitments.

True, but that doesn't absolve you from posting about a situation that was settled on page 1 when the thread is 8 pages long. Did you really think that matter was still even in need of discussion currently? Of course not. You just said it to make me look bad. Don't pretend otherwise, because if not you would have actually responded to the OP instead.


But hey, don't address the point and insult the poster. That certainly makes your argument water-tight!

I have zero reason to address any offtopic posts seriously. Boohoo for you I guess.
edit on 10-10-2017 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 10 2017 @ 02:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
The paramount argument here from "the right" has been "Yeah, well you guys did it first."

... and that kindergarten crap is the best that we've seen here.

The OP is very specific in its claim. It is obvious, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that those "on the right" seek to intimidate and silence those "on the left" by the use of terroristic threats. Those threats were documented along with all the evidence needed to support the argument: yes, conservatives do act as "thought police" as surely as any liberal.

Well done, OP.

Seriously... Like pulling teeth... I feel like I could go be a dentist or something now.



posted on Oct, 10 2017 @ 02:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

It comes down to people wanting to have any integrity and looking at all sides of an argument instead of just their own.


I'm not sure what you think I agree with here. I agree with all of it on both sides to protest as long as it is legal and does not infringe on other's rights.

It is funny that with your statement above if I apply it to myself, I disagree with 100% of what the Nazis and like groups preach and I also disagree with about 100% of what Antifa, Tea Party, BLM 99%ers have to preach too. What little I might identify with is not worth my effort.

My point in all this is that the OP wanted to paint a picture of right wing hate and that it over shadows left wing hate and that point is what I disagree with.
edit on 10-10-2017 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 10 2017 @ 02:48 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

Was I talking to you?

Your "first problem"? You might have noticed that the source in the OP is an opinion piece. You are offended because their words are "inflammatory"? Do you find yourself in need of a safe space?

Give us a break, Ketz.

You're quoting a tweet that the author gave as an example of their contention. It is not "racist" to point out that that there are white supremacists in power in this country. It is not "sexist" (or misandrist, to use your PC term) to point out that most of the positions of power in government, business, industry and academia in this country are held by men. (Or do you not understand what "patriarchy" means?)

You have an issue with facts then? What is it you folks tell those you think of as SJWs?

"Get over it snowflake."

Now ... isn't that helpful? Doesn't that all make you warm and fuzzy and amenable to discussion?

No?

Perhaps then you can understand why some on "the left" have tired of rational discussion and merely tell it like it is, these days.
edit on 10-10-2017 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Oct, 10 2017 @ 02:50 PM
link   

To be both white and male is to be subject to a potent cocktail of entitlement to economic and political power, and to dominate nonwhite and female bodies.


That speaks for itself. It's labeling an entire race of men in a negative way, which is definitive racism. It's like a KKK member who thinks their hate is justified because the hate is justified under their own twisted thinking. Same thing here.

He's saying "to be white is to be racist and sexist".

"rac·ism
the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races."



posted on Oct, 10 2017 @ 02:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero

Actually the OP article wanted to paint that picture. My goal was merely to get people to admit that it happens from both sides of the political aisle.



posted on Oct, 10 2017 @ 02:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Blaine91555

The assertion is that if one is White and male one is also a member of a privileged group.

Given basic statistics about our country's governments and businesses, this is a fact that is beyond questioning.

It's not racist to tell the truth, is it?
edit on 10-10-2017 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Oct, 10 2017 @ 02:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Blaine91555

Technically no. He CLEARLY uses the phrase, "subject to a potent cocktail". That suggests that he isn't labeling all white people as racist, but that they have an easier time coming across the mediums that push racist ideology. Understanding his words requires a careful reading of the words he chose to use, the right opted to forgo that and just say he was labeling all white people as racist. It's clearly easy to misread that passage and come to that conclusion, but that was never his intention.



posted on Oct, 10 2017 @ 02:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t




Well it happens and is one of the issues I'm trying to highlight in this OP. So I take it you are on my side and disagree with it then? Even when conservatives do it to liberals?

If the "it" you are speaking about is death threats then yes, I think any sane person would agree they are illegal and unacceptable no matter who sends them.
When did illegal activity become a partisan issue? Wrong is wrong no matter who you are.




I feel like it should be up to the students. They are the ones who will receive the content. There is no point in a university, public or private, to book a conservative speaker at a primarily liberal school. Or vice-versa. That is just looking for trouble.

So it is wrong for conservatives to attempt to stifle free speech, but ok for the students at a university to?
Sorry that makes no sense to me.
Booking an unpopular speaker is EXACTLY what free speech is for.



posted on Oct, 10 2017 @ 03:04 PM
link   
Krazy ... I think this part of the article (which clearly none of these folks have read) is directly supportive of your point:

From your article:



In response to such illegal threats of violence, Drexel has chosen to place me on administrative leave. Earlier in the week, I asked my students to explain the relation between white masculinity and mass killings, and they offered in a few short minutes of class discussion far more insight than any mainstream media outlet has offered all week. But now, their own academic freedom has been curtailed by their university, and they are unable to even attend the classes they registered for.

By bowing to pressure from racist internet trolls, Drexel has sent the wrong signal: That you can control a university’s curriculum with anonymous threats of violence.


Drexel University, in response to the activities of "right wingers" has shut down Ciccariello-Maher's class. He has been silenced. His students are deprived of his services.

There is zero way that this situation is not directly comparable to any rational person to what has happened at Berkeley, etc.



posted on Oct, 10 2017 @ 03:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
The paramount argument here from "the right" has been "Yeah, well you guys did it first."

... and that kindergarten crap is the best that we've seen here.

The OP is very specific in its claim. It is obvious, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that those "on the right" seek to intimidate and silence those "on the left" by the use of terroristic threats. Those threats were documented along with all the evidence needed to support the argument: yes, conservatives do act as "thought police" as surely as any liberal.

Well done, OP.


As I said before, how many? Anyone on both sides that tend to be very conversational will bring out the nut cases that will do something like arm chair threats as their method to engage. Weak minds on both sides, but does that really shut down the speaker/writer from continuing their point of view? Do they get a couple of threats from a provoking statement and run to their safe room?

When we talk about physically disrupting/shutting down an event the left has pretty much own that area for awhile.

I



posted on Oct, 10 2017 @ 03:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

You know what he meant and so do I. It's a common message these days. White Supremacists engage in the exact same kind of wordplay when talking about Blacks.



posted on Oct, 10 2017 @ 03:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

No but it is racist to imply that all males of a race are racist and sexist. What he's saying is clear. Same tactic Stormfront folks use to get out their message.



posted on Oct, 10 2017 @ 03:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero

How many? You tell me. How many "ANTIFA" are violent anarchists?

Oh please. Shutting down highways are the current actions by groups of people ... that don't even qualify as "left" as much as Nazis do as "right."

Do you see BLM chanting for Hillary? Does ANTIFA carry posters of Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders? No?

Could we find Nazis and White Supremacists chanting for Trump? Talking about how his policies are establishing the "America" they want to see?

You can't link "ANTIFA" or "BLM" to the Democrats ... which is the sum total of what most of you mean by "left."



posted on Oct, 10 2017 @ 03:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

Drexel University, in response to the activities of "right wingers" has shut down Ciccariello-Maher's class. He has been silenced. His students are deprived of his services.

There is zero way that this situation is not directly comparable to any rational person to what has happened at Berkeley, etc.


Wait what? Did you even read it...lol geez...


Drexel has chosen to place me on administrative leave


How did you read this and then come up with your statement above. It was his choice...he asked for it...he went off to his safe room I guess... he only silenced himself...

Get real




top topics



 
88
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join