April 11, at 7:00 PM
Room 5240, University of Wisconsin Law School
I don't know Lukianoff, but Schweber is always great fun to listen to.
April 9, 2007
"Political Correctness, Academic Speech, and Free Speech on Campus."
It's a debate, sponsored by the Federalist and American Constitutional Societies, between Greg Lukianoff of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education and polisci prof Howard Schweber.
I don't know Lukianoff, but Schweber is always great fun to listen to.
I don't know Lukianoff, but Schweber is always great fun to listen to.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
6 comments:
Ann -
Is this an actual debate? If so, what is the resolution to be debated?
Or is this just another symposium/panel discussion with the wrong name?
Oh yeah, let's get all jiggy with that, shall we?
I can only imagine the entertainment value of listening to a legal theorist debate the opposite side of the issue from someone from FIRE, one of the truly courageous, anti-PC, pro-actual-free-speech organizations in America today.
Sigh. How is it these folk keep turning up on the Wisconsin campus. Is this the place where all the dinosaurs go to die?
Paul, almost all campuses in America are the same. They almost all have speech codes. How it happened is beyond me. They want a lock on speech. Perhaps it was the Maoism of the 60s, or their taking of the communist side during Vietnam. Some have argued that it comes out of the Peace Movement's relationship with the Amish and their interest in shunning those who don't have the politically correct viewpoint. Many think that the Amish are peaceniks. Maybe so in terms of actual arms but they raised psychological warfare to a terrifying new pitch within their communities. Being shunned for years by an entire community can't be too much fun.
Lukianoff is good. He's youthful and sharp and has a lot of fun when he speaks. I can't imagine that he will lose. He wins every debate he enters. 300 like that, and we could hold off the enemy until reinforcements arrive to save western civilization which has been under almost continuous attack on campuses since the 1960s.
At this point Fire is just about the only organization left to talk in terms of legal rights for students.
Is this post proof of the right wing nut Althouse, or the clueless liberal Althouse?
On the right wing side of the ledger, she's insufficiently outraged that those awful, evil FIRE folks are even invited to the campus the way all correct thinking progressives should be.
On the left wing side of the ledger, she praises the opponent Prof. Schweber, so presumably that makes them both rabid lefties.
Judging from this review of Schweber's text on the first amendment, I'm having trouble conceiving where there would be disagreement between Schweber and Lukianoff.
Maybe it will just be a lovefest and not a debate.
I suppose Schweber might argue that FIRE is pursuing false conflicts and that their cases don't reflect real infringements on speech. But being at UW, it's hard to imagine that Schweber can honestly argue that the PC impulse within the academic world hasn't gotten out of control and has a chilling effect on dissent, debate and contrarian viewpoints being expressed by students and faculty.
That FIRE finds more support from the right than the left doesn't show that FIRE is biased, rather I think it illustrates the intellectual bankruptcy amongst some on the left. FIRE should be supported across the political spectrum, unfortunately they aren't.
XWL seems to be the only one who is paying attention--there are two people in this debate and what they will be debating may not be a topic that everyone seems to associate with "liberal academia".
So, if you want to learn, feel free to show up. But don't go for the low-hanging fruit--it just might fall and crack on your head!
Shadowfox -
I think I'm paying attention, hence my original question.
I'd still like to know what the resolution or proposition to be debated is (if any).
Post a Comment