"... and the election of Donald J. Trump as president has been seen as a rebuke to the values of higher education. Into those wounds, the right-wing provocateur and internet troll Milo Yiannopoulos has arrived like a bottle of salt. The Breitbart editor has appeared on many campuses over the past two years to perform one-liners and political commentaries designed to offend the sensibilities of liberals who have embraced a vocabulary of inclusivity and political correctness...."
From "An Internet Troll Is Invited to Speak: What’s a College President to Do?" in The Chronicle of Higher Education. It's mostly an interview with Ana Mari Cauce, president of the University of Washington, who "did not intervene last month to block Mr. Yiannopoulos, who had been invited to the campus by a student Republican club, despite the pleas of other students...."
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
७९ टिप्पण्या:
Most common injury in Washington state was also "spine dislocation", possibly because of all the spineless libs? Heheh.
Is there a standard template for articles on Milo Y.? There is a certain sameness to them. They read like a fill in the blanks document.
And one of the reasons why we let Yiannopoulos go on is that how can you shut him down and not shut down a Black Lives Matter protest?
At least they avoided that instance of cognitive dissonance.
Is Milo salt or is Milo peroxide?
Similar sting. Different results.
Conversations about Milo Y should be much shorter and should follow this format:
1. We value the First Amendment.
2. Milo has a right to speak here, under the First Amendment.
3. Liberals don't like his viewpoint, and often try to prevent him from speaking.
4. We don't necesarily agree with Milo's opinions.
5. However, we abhor viewpoint discrimination. Any student or student group who tries to prevent Milo from speaking will be expelled.
liberals who have embraced a vocabulary of inclusivity and political correctness...
I bet the Young Republican group is just giddy from the feeling of inclusiveness they get on campus.
"Lean left" does not describe it when you are on the leftist fringe.
Haven't read that much butthurt since Garrison Keillor played Chastain and the audience were not respectfully silent.
it just occurred to me that universities may have legal grounds to shutdown milo if trump passes his religious freedom bill.
Think of liberals as people who are a little more dishonest than the average person, for example, they're currently pretending that Jeff Sessions is a racist. Liberals are living a lie.
"Campuses tend to lean liberal..."
And Mao tended to lean communist.
1. We value the First Amendment.
2. Milo has a right to speak here, under the First Amendment.
3. Liberals don't like his viewpoint, and often try to prevent him from speaking.
4. We don't necesarily agree with Milo's opinions.
5. However, we abhor viewpoint discrimination. Any student or student group who tries to prevent Milo from speaking will be expelled.
That's the baffling part. Do Progs think that we LIKE their chosen speakers? Fuck no. But we're not going to shout them down. They seem to mistake that for acceptance for whatever reason.
it just occurred to me that universities may have legal grounds to shutdown milo if trump passes his religious freedom bill.
I'd be curious as to how. Criticism of a religion is verboten under any reading of the First Amendment?
"embraced a vocabulary"
Horrid writing like this is a good warning sign that there's bullshit ahead.
@damikesc i mean they could concievably shut him down on religious grounds because of his sexuality, no? not sure if they would, but who knows.
a vocabulary of inclusivity and political correctness....
Many colors, many genders, many orientations, one opinion.
vicari valdez: @damikesc i mean they could concievably shut him down on religious grounds because of his sexuality, no? not sure if they would, but who knows.
Milo isn't straight. So no, the religious fanatics at Berkeley wouldn't shut him down because of his sexuality.
...a rebuke to the values of higher education.
Nice to start the day with a good laugh.
That and "emotional wounds". "Higher education" is absurdly feminized.
Embraced a vocabulary but not a practice of inclusiveness and tolerance
Angel-Dyne said...
vicari valdez: @damikesc i mean they could concievably shut him down on religious grounds because of his sexuality, no? not sure if they would, but who knows.
Milo isn't straight. So no, the religious fanatics at Berkeley wouldn't shut him down because of his sexuality.
sure, that would be one possibility. another is that they would do something disingenuous (and perhaps ideologically inconsistent) and ban him because he's not straight.
Berkeley did not deny his right to speak " Even though University of California Chancellor Nicholas Dirks objected to what he called Yiannopoulos's "harassment, slander, defamation, and hate speech," the university, not wanting to violate hard-won freedoms of expression at Sproul, did not cancel Yiannopoulos's event."
That's the baffling part. Do Progs think that we LIKE their chosen speakers?
I'm beginning to think they do think that. Or think that they are so correct, others *need* to hear their speakers to hear the right kind of thinking.
The raw wounds part is embarrassing. If they would asses themselves, they would see they are not wounded and are quite fine. It is very possible to get through 4-8 years of a president you don't adore.
Although it occurs to me kids on college campuses have never lived through a Republican presidency that was treated with any kind of respect from the media or other liberals.
Curious George, 7:18, you beat me to it. But I'll add, Sumo wrestlers tend to be heavyset.
Oh I LOVES me some free speech. It's the bedrock of learning here at Truthful U.
But that guy is a HATER. HATE speech. Dangerous speech. Daaaaaangerous speech.
He certainly doesn't represent the values of old Truthful U.
In fact we find him so dangerous that safe places are established throughout campus.
I have ordered the Campus Police to be out in force to protect the rights of anyone wishing to express their first amendment rights to march, shout down and disrupt this hateful, dangerous man.
But he's still allowed to speak because we support free speech here at Truthful U.
Wink-wink, nudgingly yours,
Chancellor Goodthink
the university, not wanting to violate hard-won freedoms of expression at Sproul, did not cancel Yiannopoulos's event.
Who did, then?
Perhaps so-called "Judge" Robart could issue a temporary restraining order against Milo giving speeches on campuses.
Don't Milo's speeches affect Microsoft and Google somehow?
Known Unknown: "the university, not wanting to violate hard-won freedoms of expression at Sproul, did not cancel Yiannopoulos's event."
Who did, then?
Ms. Plausibelle Deniabilité
(See JAORE @8:22)
While recoiling at most of the narrative coming out of my alma mater, I applaud Ms. Cauce's decision mostly because she didn't bow to the demand of some students who seem to think they set university policy.
Campuses don't "lean liberal", in fact the overwhelming majority of campus liberals are in the closet lest they be treated like Althouse is treated. Campuses are overwhelmingly far left.
Rick said...
the overwhelming majority of campus liberals are in the closet lest they be treated like Althouse is treated.
Althouse had tenure and was paid 170K per year with a generous retirement package. A lot of people would like to get the same 'treatment'.
The universities are failing their students, in not insisting that they behave like adults. Part of being an adult is learning how to lose. It happens a lot in life.
When you lose an election, nobody gets a participation trophy.
Althouse had tenure and was paid 170K per year with a generous retirement package. A lot of people would like to get the same 'treatment'.
Let's note the philosophy underlying this statement: we can treat people any way we want as long as we don't fire them and they're sufficiently paid. How is this consistent with harassment rules or microaggressions which, according to the left, are more important than basic free speech principles?
Althouse has mentioned the casual slights and criticism she's received over the years. This is hard to deal with, knowing even moderate political positions will cause social ostracism. People who endure this deserve credit for their mental toughness, but they are ultimately not the targets. The targets are the people more susceptible to the ostracism who choose to hide their beliefs rather than be shunned. Don't be fooled that this is evolution, it was the intentional culture cultivated by the 60s radicals as they marched through the institutions.
It's revealing ARM supports social ostracism of moderates to support far left political beliefs. But it does conflict with his effort to brand himself a moderate doesn't it?
ARM: I presume you know that Ann is actually pretty much a pariah, it sounds like.
She doesn't support guillotining every person who doesn't sing the Internationale or recite Mao's Red book from memory 5 times a day while praying to Marx, so she's dangerous and clearly an evil Reichwinger and must be destroyed. Just ask any administrator at U-Madison if they wish they could have stripped her of tenure and fired her years ago. When they are drunk and actually not lying, I'll wager 95% of them wish they could have gotten rid of her years ago.
Because after all, tolerance of opposing views violates the very core of leftist thought. Not liberal thought (classical liberal), but leftist thought.
--Vance
Even places that "lean Liberal" like Berkeley have a very large minority that disagrees but says nothing because of a fear of consequences. The left will take your job, will lower marks, will harass you on social media - if at all possible. An administrator like the one in Seattle simply ignores this. Inclusivity means disregard the right, disregard students who are Trump supporters, disregard the concerns that made Trump President. Think about the immigrants, do not think about the blacks whose jobs the immigrants take. Then the PCists get enormous surprises like the election. The large minority in liberal areas joins the majority elsewhere. It shouldn't surprise anyone but inclusivity seems to repel unwanted facts and obvious conclusions as a goldfish bowl includes water but excludes air creating a safe space - as long as the air dweller feeds you.
It seems the snowflakes are out in force today. Academic life can be tough in the limited sense that you may not be feted as you feel you should be for what you believe but, come on, this is not exactly a hard life.
Compare Althouse's situation to Alfred Wegener's. Wegener developed a deep and fundamental insight into how the world works and was ridiculed for years until finally, after his death, experimental evidence accumulated to vindicate his insight. This guy had something to complain about. Still, like Althouse, he was protected by rules of academic tenure.
The raw wounds part is embarrassing. If they would asses themselves, they would see they are not wounded and are quite fine. It is very possible to get through 4-8 years of a president you don't adore.
The raw wounds will heal if you stop picking at them. Use a bandaid or something.
This inability to even conceive of listening to the opposing arguments or allow any thoughts that might cause you to think is something that I just can't fathom. They seem more like religious fanatics who won't tolerate any heresy or deviation from the true faith than college student, professors who profess to be educated tolerant liberals.
Dust Bunny Queen said...
The raw wounds will heal if you stop picking at them. Use a bandaid or something.
Wouldn't this be the same advice you might give Althouse?
She was more reasonable in that interview than I expected, even if she did make it clear that she thinks Milo's fans are Nazis. But I guess it's better that she still pretends (?) she cares about free speech - that's more than one can say about many college administrators these days.
We're taking the 17 year old to visit Hillsdale next month. The list of schools we're willing to pay for has gotten a lot smaller over the past few years. College administrators are making this process easy for parents who are paying attention.
Berkeley Police, seeing a brawl building as Yiannopoulos's skinhead goons high-stepped around the building, canceled the event and whisked the provocateur out the back door.
AReasonableMan said...Wouldn't this be the same advice you might give Althouse?
No. A gadfly's sting is supposed to hurt. A goad's application is supposed to provoke.
Wilbur posits: Part of being an adult is learning how to lose. It happens a lot in life.
But the millenials all got trophies at the soccer match. Nobody loses. Ever.
Did you ever consider that althouse was disliked at UW not because of her politics but because she abused her tenure the last ten years of her career by writing a blog instead of doing serious legal research?
liberals who have embraced a vocabulary of congruence and progressive corruption, confusion, and contortion.
roesch/voltaire said...Berkeley Police, seeing a brawl building as Yiannopoulos's skinhead goons high-stepped around the building
Right, and O'Brien's holding up five fingers and not four. What purpose is served by such ridiculous, nonsensical mischaracterization of things we can all see on Youtube in an instant?
millennials, that is...
I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.
Martin Luther King, Jr. would not be welcome on a liberal campus where [class] diversity has planted its institutional roots.
Freder Frederson said...Did you ever consider that althouse was disliked at UW not because of her politics but because she abused her tenure the last ten years of her career by writing a blog instead of doing serious legal research?
Well, personally I consider and disregard any number of plainly-incorrect things every day. I haven't kept a catalog of them, but it's possible something close to your hypothetical was in there at some point.
Did you ever consider the possibility that water won't certainly wet you, or that fire won't certainly burn? Probably--but it's wrong.
HoodlumDoodlum said...
No. A gadfly's sting is supposed to hurt. A goad's application is supposed to provoke.
In the case of Wegener, opposing academics were trying to kill his ideas not sting or provoke. His ideas were considered wrong by most at the time. This is what academics is about, creating consensuses on what does or does not give us the most accurate representation of our world. The consensus position is not always right, which is why academic tenure is important, to allow dissenting voices a platform. It doesn't guarantee that those dissenting voices will be feted for their contrarian views.
I'd sure like to see video of “Yiannopoulos's skinhead goons high-stepp[ing] around the building….”
ARM states: The consensus position is not always right, which is why academic tenure is important, to allow dissenting voices a platform.
Man-caused climate change is a good example. But there are many more.
@RV - the same police who ignored numerous crimes being committed in front of them, refusing to intervene and arrest even a single violent thug, in the enthusing riot? I lot of the country is of the opinion that the riot occurred, where it did, because the rioters knew that they could do so there with impunity.
Curious George said...
"Campuses tend to lean liberal..."
And Mao tended to lean communist.
"Mao crazy man!" -- Chinese woman who was forced to live in a cave and had her radio taken away so she couldn't listen to the likes of Milo Youhavepooplol.
I've always liked that short, sweet quote, but 'tis funny how taking away her radio is so similar to taking away Milo.
AReasonableMan said.... The consensus position is not always right, which is why academic tenure is important, to allow dissenting voices a platform. It doesn't guarantee that those dissenting voices will be feted for their contrarian views.
We agree it's good Wegener could make his argument, then. Presumably we agree that his fellow academics, even in opposing him, should have been respectful of his ideas & the need to hear him, too. If you get my drift.
mockturtle said...
Man-caused climate change is a good example.
This is an opinion. Without data and/or a logical argument it is valueless.
HoodlumDoodlum said...
even in opposing him, should have been respectful of his ideas & the need to hear him, too.
Isn't this just civility bullshit? They weren't respectful, they thought his ideas were nonsense. As is often the case, commonsense failed them.
roesch/voltaire said...
Are you THE Larry Roesch? Of the Larry Roesch Auto Group in Elmhurst & Bensenville, your source for quality vehicles from Ford, Volkswagen, Chrysler, Dodge, and Jeep in the Elmhurst, IL, area since 1923?
Cuz it'd be cool to get the wisdom of a famous celebrity, especially a really old one.
And do these Progs not realize that CONSERVATIVE students were quite unhappy when Obama won in 2012?
They just, you know, dealt with it. Like the adults they want to try and be.
Althouse had tenure and was paid 170K per year with a generous retirement package. A lot of people would like to get the same 'treatment'.
Yet the Left seems to believe that conservatives have no desire for that gig.
Berkeley Police, seeing a brawl building as Yiannopoulos's skinhead goons high-stepped around the building, canceled the event and whisked the provocateur out the back door.
Antifa domestic terror groups are hardly right-wing and hardly supportive of Milo.
It's like saying "well, Bull Connor didn't do anything wrong. It was those uppity negroes causing all of the shenanigans"/
The consensus position is not always right, which is why academic tenure is important, to allow dissenting voices a platform.
Except it was opposing academics that were the issue. Tenure is supposed to protect from the administration firing you. Tenure, mind you, is not remotely needed.
If academics are unwilling to listen to contrary ideas, perhaps they are more ideologue than academic.
AReasonableMan said...Isn't this just civility bullshit? They weren't respectful, they thought his ideas were nonsense. As is often the case, commonsense failed them.
I should have been more clear: we agree it's good he was "allowed" to hold and publicize his particular ideas/beliefs. You are correct that "respectful" was the wrong word. The line between good manners and civility bullshit is important but I doubt we can get much of a consensus on where it is. There's a difference between tolerance and intolerance, though.
I should have been more clear: we agree it's good he was "allowed" to hold and publicize his particular ideas/beliefs. You are correct that "respectful" was the wrong word. The line between good manners and civility bullshit is important but I doubt we can get much of a consensus on where it is. There's a difference between tolerance and intolerance, though.
I cannot think of any college that does not have specific rules against shouting down speakers invited to speak on campus.
Yet approximately zero of them will do a thing when it is violated to attack a conservative.
The consensus position is not always right,
wait wait wait just a gosh darned minute..........you mean all the watermelons who have been screaming about the consensus on climate change for the last ten years are full of shit?
How will I sleep at night?
Every patient neuro/psych evaluation includes insight and judgement. I hate having to choose "impaired" over "intact" but sometimes it is better not to lie.
abused her tenure the last ten years of her career by writing a blog instead of doing serious legal research?
I disagree. The blog promotes the Wisconsin law school. Still does. The blog reaches hundreds (thousands?) of people.
I'm not sure what legal research is, but it sounds like an obscure title buried in the stacks, and it doesn't have an Amazon portal in the corner.
The university president’s argument for why students should “stay away” instead of protesting? “If there had been no protest, what you’d see is a line of mostly white men, who might be described by some as ‘macho,’ standing in line for hours to see a gay man in a boa in essence perform camp.”
I think the fact that Milo is flamboyantly gay is probably part of the reason he is so hated by progressives -- they'd hate him anyway, but they really hate him because he is a gay man. It's sort of like Pim Fortuyn -- they hate Geert Wilders today, but they really hated Pim Fortuyn because he was gay, and he exposed, in his person, the fundamental contradiction between current tolerance of homosexuality and a policy of importing huge numbers of future voters from a foreign culture where homosexuality is not merely illegal, but can carry the death penalty. You see something similar going on with the Front National in France. That tension is probably behind some of the European support for a total ban on immigration from majority Muslim countries (note: not just the seven singled out in Trump's EO).
At some point, progressives are going to have to resolve this contradiction, but for the time being, they're just exploding with stupid, violent rage and denial at anyone who exposes it.
This is an opinion. Without data and/or a logical argument it is valueless.
Actually, ARM, there are plenty of data.
damikesc said...I cannot think of any college that does not have specific rules against shouting down speakers invited to speak on campus.
Yet approximately zero of them will do a thing when it is violated to attack a conservative.
De jure <> de facto; sure. It's a problem.
Re: damikesc & HoodlumDoodlum:
Yet approximately zero of them will do a thing when it is violated to attack a conservative.
The magic of prosecutorial discretion.
mockturtle said...
Actually, ARM, there are plenty of data.
There are, just little or none of it supports your position. But, if you have a water tight case against global warming I can guarantee that there are big megaphones out there just dying to hear and promulgate it.
ARM, I truly hope you live long enough to see your beloved theory collapse. It will.
mockturtle said...
ARM, I truly hope you live long enough to see your beloved theory collapse
A. Not my theory.
B. I am a bit of skeptic myself but currently I am even more skeptical of the skeptics who don't seem to have much in the way of data or theory on their side.
Fernandinande said...
roesch/voltaire said...
Are you THE Larry Roesch? Of the Larry Roesch Auto Group in Elmhurst & Bensenville, your source for quality vehicles from Ford, Volkswagen, Chrysler, Dodge, and Jeep in the Elmhurst, IL, area since 1923?
Cuz it'd be cool to get the wisdom of a famous celebrity, especially a really old one.
2/10/17, 11:19 AM
No, I think Roesch was a German serial killer back in the late 1800s, a peer of Jack the Ripper or so. Why him with Voltaire, I don't know.
" offend the sensibilities of liberals who have embraced a vocabulary of inclusivity "
they keep using that word. I do not think it means what they think it means...
The most curious thing is that NO ONE is forced to go hear some speaker invited to campus. Most students are too busy (either studying or partying) to even be aware that speakers come to campus. The only one I can remember is Tom Wolfe and my date thought it would be the famous Thomas Wolfe, not the hipster author. These people are offended that Milo even exists.
Why are they offended so much at Milo? Same reason they hate black conservatives. Blacks and gays are supposed to be captive partisans, not to be let off the reservation. They should obediently spout leftist talking points. It is the same reason feminists were apoplectic about women voting for Trump--not be allowed!! You MUST vote and think the way we tell you!!! Having minorities running around making up their own minds about things simply won't do.
Why are they offended so much at Milo? Same reason they hate black conservatives. Blacks and gays are supposed to be captive partisans, not to be let off the reservation. They should obediently spout leftist talking points. It is the same reason feminists were apoplectic about women voting for Trump--not be allowed!! You MUST vote and think the way we tell you!!! Having minorities running around making up their own minds about things simply won't do.
Well said, Unknown.
ARM: "I can guarantee that there are big megaphones out there just dying to hear and promulgate it."
No, you can't. You can guarantee that leftmedia will bury anything that discredits global warming. It, abortion and calumny are all the Democrats have left.
hombre said...
No, you can't.
Yes, I can.
But, if you have a water tight case against global warming
If you mean a case why we shouldn't give a shit about something that has been happening for centuries and we can't change...I do:
The current ice age, called the Quaternary began two and a half million years ago.
So all of human existence has occurred in an ice age.
Human History goes back 5,500 years.
Civilization goes back about 6,000 years.
The current interglacial period (or global warming) called the Holocene, began somewhere between 10,000 and 15,000 years ago.
So throughout all of human history, all of human civilization, global warming has been occurring.
Modern humans first appeared about 200,000 years ago. We spent around 190,000 of those years wandering around as hunter gathers, picking lice off of each other in caves. Then around 10,000 years ago we discovered agriculture, and that lead to surplus, which lead to specialization which lead to cities, civilization and history.
Life has gotten infinitely better for humanity the warmer the Earth has gotten. There are more people living on Earth than ever before, with a higher standard of living than ever before, and lower hunger and poverty rates than ever before.
Why can't the Left take pleasure in that?
Just because some warming is good doesn't mean that more is desirable. At a minimum it is disruptive of civilization's infrastructure and the possibility that it could become a run away process is at the very least something that should be seriously studied.
Just because some warming is good doesn't mean that more is desirable.
Given that the end of warming and the Holocene means a return of glaciation and a mile of ice on top of Chicago....I vote for warming.
At a minimum it is disruptive of civilization's infrastructure
The only thing disruptive to civilization's infrastructure so far have been the hysterical over reactions of the alarmists.
and the possibility that it could become a run away process is at the very least something that should be seriously studied.
It has been. At some point in the future, just as in the past, there will come a time in which there is no snow or ice on the surface of the Earth. At some point in the future, as in the past, there will come a time when the Earth is almost frozen solid with surface ice. Frankly at this point the latter is more probable because we are currently in an ice age.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा