12 ms·

We dissent

211 points by zabramow 11y ago

rdancer 11y ago
These intellectually bankrupt movements horrify me. Perfectly-well-meaning people, while supposedly building a bright tomorrow, create hell. Just like the 1950s Czechoslovakia. University execs scared not to cater to idiotic demands, public shaming, double-speak, government-sanctioned kangaroo courts. It's like Lord of the Flies II: The College Years. I would like to know if the Hitler Jugend were like this, too?
- richmarr 11y ago
  Not disagreeing, I find this whole situation bizarre, but do you mind sharing some of your reasoning?
  - rdancer 11y ago
    > Perfectly-well-meaning people, while supposedly building a bright tomorrow, create hell. Just like the 1950s Czechoslovakia. University execs scared not to cater to idiotic demands, public shaming, double-speak, government-sanctioned kangaroo courts. After WWII, the Czechoslovak communists were faced with the problem of replacing the management of literally the whole country's public sector, as well as the newly nationalized formerly private sector, with people loyal to the new Republic. This meant no Nazi or Western collaborators, this meant purges. A lot of good people were chewed up, some died in prison or were executed. In the universities that had been closed since shortly after the beginning of the war, the students were allowed to take over, and run the administration, and later conduct the purges. This gave tremendous responsibility to people who had no qualification, no training, no life experience; and also tremendous power to people who by bribery or false testimony leveraged the system for personal gain or revenge. These drumhead hearings were not dissimilar to the Title IX hearings that take place on the campuses today. Here also are people with inappropriate training, perjury is rampant, the verdict is swift, but can it really be called just? Read Kundera's The Joke[1] (also a 1968 movie), for a good illustration of the absurdity of it all. The protagonist sends a letter to his girlfriend with a joke regarding something or other. She finds the joke offensive, shares her concern with some of her colleagues, a hearing is called, and our protagonist finds himself kicked out of the university, and branded politically unreliable. This means he can barely get the worst of jobs, and will in fact be forced to work in a penal colony for a few years. Never having been convicted of a crime, never having been given the opportunity to defend himself in a court of law. Because of a joke. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Joke_(novel) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Joke_(novel)
    - defen 11y ago
      Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences. Since this is the internet I'll note that I'm being sarcastic, and attempting to demonstrate the intellectual bankruptcy of such a statement, which we hear all the time when these sorts of things happen.
      - gliese1337 11y ago
        Uh, yeah, actually it does. Not all consequences, but some very specific and very important ones. That's the entire legal definition of "freedom of speech"- that actions actions cannot be taken against you to restrict your freedom to say what you want, nor to punish you after the fact. When such restrictions or punishments are in place, you are not, in fact, free to speak. Now private universities, for example, not being governmental institutions, are not required by the constitution to guarantee free speech rights within their domain. But there are good reasons why that right was encoded in the constitution to limit the power of our national government, and they apply just as well to the governing bodies of universities and other private institutions.
        dmix 11y ago
        Universities and private institutions lack the check on that power that the government has with the judicial system. So even a policy of ardent free speech in these institutions would be on weak ground without a system to accuse or appeal misjudgment by the power holders. The best system they have is public discourse... the media or internet, But modern corporate media, much like University administrators, have demonstrated to be extremely unwilling to offend anybody. They rarely take a strong stances towards freedom of speech, preferring to appease via resignations and public apologies. Additionally if Reddit is any indication the internet is not a great place for thoughtful political discussion.
      - rdancer 11y ago
        I'm afraid sarcasm is often lost on our more zealous comrades.
- randomname2 11y ago
  Indeed history repeating itself. Book burning started on college campuses as well. Not necessarily the Hitler Jugend, but Fascism was also considered an "intellectual movement" in its heydays, very popular on college campuses with perfectly well-meaning people.
  - _delirium 11y ago
    I don't think you're correct on that point historically. Fascism was mainly a lower-class phenomenon, not really rooted in universities or intellectuals. There were certainly a handful of intellectuals who did align with it (esoteric pagan types in the Völkisch movement, some racial theorists, and a handful of philosophers), but it wasn't their main base. For one thing, German universities at the time had a quite large proportion of Jewish faculty and students, who for obvious reasons were not sympathetic to the Nazis. And even the right-wing part of the intellectual milieu mostly aligned with the older conservative parties, not with the Nazis, who they saw as uncouth rabble. As a result, the Nazis had to impose themselves on universities against considerable resistance, and to do so had to fire a large proportion of the faculty, and then appoint a bunch of its own functionaries to replace them. There's a reason Hitler gave speeches in places like beer halls, not the University of Munich.
    - vlehto 11y ago
      Fascism and Nazism are not the same thing. Nazism is subset of Fascism. Which is lot more international phenomena. And it has had limited support in various places. My home country fostered few Fascists movements before and during WWII. One of them included lots of people from academia. While curiously there is no mention anywhere that they would have persecuted domestic ethnic minorities. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriotic_People's_Movement_%28Finland%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriotic_People's_Movement_%2...
tptacek 11y ago
Above all, we are disappointed that you and President Chodosh weren’t brave enough to come to the defense of a student who was told she was “derailing” because her opinions regarding racism didn’t align with those of the mob around her. Nor were you brave enough to point out that these protesters were perfectly happy to use this student to further their own agenda, but turned on her as soon as they realized she wasn’t supporting their narrative. These protesters were asking you to protect your students, but you didn’t even defend the one who needed to be protected right in front of you. It's like nobody on any side of any of these university free speech issues can keep themselves on the rails. These people don't seem to get it either. Students don't need "protection" from free speech, nor does anyone need to be rescued from the "mockery" and "humiliation" of an accusation of racism. Demands for journalism-free "safe spaces" are bad, but so too is the idea that accusations of racism are so beyond the pale that people need to be shielded from them by institutions.
- posnet 11y ago
  Sure, its not the institutions role to protect accusations of racism. But watch the video yourself and make a judgement on who, if anyone was being racist. (Ignore the inflammatory title, this is the best one I can find) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8UTj8lQJhY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8UTj8lQJhY
  - tptacek 11y ago
    Who cares if "they're" the racists? It's always the same thing, both on the protester's side and the institution, stretching back years: someone does something dumb, and someone else overreacts.
    - posnet 11y ago
      I didn't say anyone was. I don't think anyone was being racist in the video. I was just trying to provide context to the paragraph you quoted in case you hadn't seen the video.
    - gozo 11y ago
hackuser 11y ago
Just a thought for those trying to figure out what's going on: If you find what the protest movements are doing to be challenging, that's the idea. Much social change begins this way; it's like disruption in tech. People find the whole idea of it challenging to their worldview and comfortable status quo, and they (we) respond predictably - angry, scared, dimissive. It's heresy. But if the status quo worked so well, we wouldn't need social change. In some cases, people get the idea and come around and what was heresy becomes the new status quo (for the next generation to up end, upsetting the current protestors when they are older and settled). It's similar to early adoption of disruptive technology. That doesn't make every disruptive idea, socially or in tech, good, but the fact that it disrupts your social ideas is not, in itself, problematic. For myself, when I feel myself responding that way, I try to take it as a sign that there's something beyond my perspective that I don't understand.
- wfo 11y ago
  I would agree it seems our normal methods to deal with, say institutionalized racism have failed. This method seems to be to publicly abuse, harass, and destroy the lives of anyone who dares step outside the social justice orthodoxy even for a moment. This isn't disruptive or new, it is a mob ruling by fear and rolling over any attempt to pause and think and be reasonable, as old as human history and as distasteful.
- BoxFour 11y ago
  Caveat: This is a response to a more general concept, not necessarily applicable to this particular issue > Much social change begins this way Much social change also DOESN'T begin this way (see: OWS), and it can be frustrating for people who agree with the underlying principles behind protests but think the execution is disheartening and misguided. Especially because these kinds of movements tend to be the story that gets told: People with thoughtful dissents get eclipsed by the more vociferous and extreme (one could argue that this is because extremes tend to be better fodder for the media). > For myself, when I feel myself responding that way, I try to take it as a sign that there's something beyond my perspective that I don't understand. I think that's a somewhat simplistic view of it. It's entirely possible to understand and have a developed perspective of an idea, and to still reject it - sometimes vehemently. Sure, some disruptive ideas are very challenging and ultimately end up being a good thing. The vast majority are not, though. Sometimes those disruptive ideas are detrimental, and it's not hard to see why people get angry when those detrimental effects start surfacing in visible ways (e.g. anti-vaccination).
kelukelugames 11y ago
The main criticism is that Dean Spellman referred to a marginalized student as "not fitting the [Claremont Mckenna] mold". This is harmful. It is more than a poor choice of words. She should have apologized and done some training. But the students are young and have no where else to direct their frustration. I hope Spellman can land on her feet. And I hope minority students can feel less marginalized on campus.
- 001sky 11y ago
  I'd disagree, completely. Its just shitty english grammer. The notion that somone might not "fit [a] mold", is a trivial comment. The implication that if someone mis-states this comment as saying someone might not "fit [the] mold" is simply the substitution of the definite for the indefinite article. Put another way, there is no "literal" truth to the comment. There is not [a] mold; nor are there [any] molds that exist (in the literal sense) at any college. That whole expression is a figue of speech. TLRD--this whole thing is about a fucking typo in an e-mail.
  - kelukelugames 11y ago
    I hope you don't disagree completely with wishing Spellman luck in finding another job and the students being in a better place too. ;) Of course Spellman didn't intend to hurt, but leaders should have more situational awareness. I wish people here had empathy for the students. Being a minority in this country can be hard. They are not upset because of a single grammar mistake. They've experienced dozens of slights and want the campus administrators to be more aware. For example, here is a video of the Ithaca incident: [1]. The panelists had a tone deaf moment due to a poor choice of words, and it's a moment that any of us could have had. Of course, if you think it's 100% okay to refer to black people as savages then we won't ever find any common ground. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-QNeQR3WAg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-QNeQR3WAg PS Look for the guy in the green shirt at the end of the video.
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
seibelj 11y ago
I wrote a long argument but deleted it all in favor of this. Everyone needs to toughen the fuck up and stop being offended so easily. Someone insults you for being different? Welcome to real life, get some thicker skin.
- mingus68040 11y ago
  Right. In that case I'm sure you'll understand if I tell you to fuck right off.
  - 001sky 11y ago
    You're not even clever enough to insult
    - mingus68040 11y ago
      What's wrong? Skin too thin? Maybe you should toughen up.
      - 001sky 11y ago
        --Says puppet account, with lifetime negative karma
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
- __derek__ 11y ago
  That's a very easy thing to say from a place of privilege, with current and historical institutions set up to protect and enforce your (and my) interests. Edit: Here, I'll put it better: by telling people from historically disadvantaged groups to buck up and be quiet, you're effectively saying, "I reject your understanding of your experiences, so your perspective is invalid."
  - jnbiche 11y ago
nugget 11y ago
These protestors just hurt themselves in the long run. That's the saddest part. ''The arc of the moral universe is long but it bends toward justice.'' Yes, and we all have a moral obligation to stand up to injustices that we see. But embracing victimhood as an identity does nothing for you. It keeps you stuck where you are and unable to move forward. You start to mistake pity for respect. University administrators are doing them a huge disservice by making them think otherwise. In the lion and tiger filled jungle of the real world they are in for a rude awakening. Marcus Aurelius, writing two thousand years ago: "Our actions may be impeded, but there can be no impeding our intentions or dispositions. Because we can accommodate and adapt. The mind adapts and converts to its own purposes the obstacle to our acting. The impediment to action advances action. What stands in the way becomes the way." I wish I had more than one upvote to give this editorial.
joesmo 11y ago
I wonder what these students will think when they get into an industry like software programming that's full of racism and sexism that they have no control over (if they manage to get past those obstacles to get in in the first place). They are doing themselves a disservice by not learning how to deal not only with people who hold different opinions than they do, but also with people who are blatantly racist, sexist, or just plain assholes. While the rest of us are trying to deal with the real issue of the loss of free speech due to surveillance and censorship by authorities, they're contributing in their own little ways the final blows to a free society, a contribution undoubtedly much lauded by the traditional enemy of free speech, the state. And in return, they make absolutely no positive difference to the status quo whatsoever. Even the hunger strikes are cute. A reminiscence of Ghandi? Seriously? It take a lot longer than a week to die of starvation and I doubt any of those students have the resolve to see a hunger strike out. The dean bowed down to cowardice by being a coward herself so it's clear she's not cut out for the job. I wonder if there are still people who are cut out for it? As far as the issue of "safe space," if these students think such a thing actually exists, they're too stupid to be attending college. A better admissions process should weed them out.
- quonn 11y ago
  > when they get into an industry like software programming that's full of racism and sexism Is it like that in the US? Really? Especially when compared to other professions. I do not know, but I have serious doubts. Please enlighten me.
  - gkop 11y ago
    It depends who you ask. From my vantage point, sexism is thankfully and rightfully getting increasing attention in recent years in the software/tech sector, but still persists widely. Unfortunately America is still full of racism, including in software development, and so far tech has done very little whatsoever to heed the problem. I can't answer your last question, I don't know if tech is any more bigoted than other professions, my career has been exclusively in tech.
  - joesmo 11y ago
twelfthnight 11y ago
In high school, I had a teacher who had a rack of books/comics which he lent to students. One day, a single student complained about curse words / nudity in some of the books, and the teacher was forced to take those books out of the school. This struck me as silly. Why let one person's complaint take away this great thing for all of the students? Also in high school, there was a girl who was into hard core music and died her hair blue. She was routinely mocked in the halls for being weird. This also struck me as silly. Why should a person, just because they have a minority interest / opinion, be forced to deal with such harassment? I'm empathetic to both sides of this issue. However, I think we should generally err on the side of not harassing people, even if that causes unnecessary inconveniences for the majority sometimes.
- rdancer 11y ago
  I don't think you're making your point very well: Being forced not to bully Bluelocks does not inconvenience you. Having the opportunity (not obligation) to read something you don't want to read does not inconvenience you either. If anything, we should, in a secular state, agree that people differ in their view of morality, and we should be tolerant of each other's needs, perceived or otherwise.
  - iamsohungry 11y ago
    > If anything, we should, in a secular state, agree that people differ in their view of morality, and we should be tolerant of each other's needs, perceived or otherwise. The problem is that some people's perceived needs are not compatible with other people's perceived needs. In order to decide which group gets their perceived needs, I think it makes sense to have a societal conversation about which of those perceived needs are actual needs, and which of those perceived needs are just wants.
  - hackuser 11y ago
    > I don't think you're making your point very well This is unnecessary. Please just make your point without criticizing the author.
- deleted 11y ago
hackuser 11y ago
The best place to start understanding social protest and its disruptive approach (not unlike the disruption practiced by many in SV) is Martin Luther King's Letter From a Birmingham Jail. I recommend the whole thing, but here are excerpts [1] -------- 16 April 1963 My Dear Fellow Clergymen: While confined here in the Birmingham city jail, I came across your recent statement calling my present activities "unwise and untimely." ... You deplore the demonstrations taking place in Birmingham. But your statement, I am sorry to say, fails to express a similar concern for the conditions that brought about the demonstrations. ... My friends, I must say to you that we have not made a single gain in civil rights without determined legal and nonviolent pressure. Lamentably, it is an historical fact that privileged groups seldom give up their privileges voluntarily. Individuals may see the moral light and voluntarily give up their unjust posture; but, as Reinhold Niebuhr has reminded us, groups tend to be more immoral than individuals. ... Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored. ... I must confess that I am not afraid of the word "tension." I have earnestly opposed violent tension, but there is a type of constructive, nonviolent tension which is necessary for growth. Just as Socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the mind so that individuals could rise from the bondage of myths and half truths to the unfettered realm of creative analysis and objective appraisal ... I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection. -------- [1] http://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.html http://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.h...
- drumdance 11y ago
Shivetya 11y ago
Sorry, but this whole college uprising is way too coordinated and the idea of personal space/safe space, college costs, and the like, are just political staging for the 2016 election similar to how OWS was for 2012. Its all backed by groups with connections to political players who need to energize this group as the candidate they will be stuck with is damaged and boring goods. Figure the focus of one campaign will simply be "fixing" college, from how students are coddled to offering to pay for it all. Just watch.
- vlehto 11y ago
  I've got even more exiting theory for you. What if GOP and Democrats are ruling together? Let the people argue about guns, abortion, racism etc. Meanwhile Clinton-Bush coalition is agreeing on corporate welfare, monetary policy and military expeditions. If they ever get caught, it's just "working over the aisle". If that doesn't fly, just swap representatives. Add infinitum, because no third challenging party could ever appear in such seemingly polarized political environment.
- scarmig 11y ago
  That's pretty conspiratorially-minded. Hillary Clinton's campaign, to the extent it has an opinion, would prefer these mini-conflagrations simply not happen during the election year. They do nothing except inflame the Republican base and alienate everyone except a small subset of student and Tumblr activists. Their very existence suggests that sooner or later she'll have to engage with the topic, which is a negative sum game for the Democratic candidate compared to yelling about how crazy the Republican candidates are.
hackuser 11y ago
Here's a perspective on why the protesters seem to dislike news media coverage. (I'll add that there is much criticism here with little investigation of the actual facts and assertions of the protesters. I'm not trying to take a side, but to add some substance to the discussion.) "There’s a good reason protesters at the University of Missouri didn’t want the media around" https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/11/11/theres-a-good-reason-protesters-at-the-university-of-missouri-didnt-want-the-media-around/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/11/11/... Certainly, Tai - like any journalist - had a legal right to enter the space, given that it was in a public area. But that shouldn’t be the end of this story. We in the media have something important to learn from this unfortunate exchange. The protesters had a legitimate gripe: The black community distrusts the news media because it has failed to cover black pain fairly. ... I've read plenty, for many years, that corroborates this point of view.
- facepalm 11y ago
  You could formulate that in a more straightforward way: people don't want stuff they disagree with being written in the newspaper.
  - rdancer 11y ago
    people don't want to be libelled in the newspaper
    - Jeema101 11y ago
      Opinion is not libel.
      - rdancer 11y ago
        You're correct. Defamation set in print is libel.
pducks32 11y ago
I just wanted to say that I was reading the comments here and it hit me that this is the Internet I love. So often we talk about dialogue and having a conversation and I really believe the Internet is perfect for that because its hard to raise your voice on the Internet and silence someone else, but we rarely get it because—for example—Facebook isn't very threaded and you have your name attached and are only having a conversation with your "friends" so its insular. On the other side is Reddit where charged things like this just don't work well. However on HN people write thoughtful, dissenting, sourced, and well-written arguments and we have full discussions. It's fantastic. This is the Internet I love.
rrauenza 11y ago
Reminds me of the warnings in this article http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/09/the-coddling-of-the-american-mind/399356/ http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/09/the-codd...
javajosh 11y ago
I like it. I stand by and watch some leaders stubbornly refuse any culpability at all no matter how universal the detractors, and other leaders crumble at the first sign of frission. Clearly both are extreme reactions, and problematic. I (we?) want leaders who don't pull a GW Bush and stick their fingers in their ears for all criticism. We also don't want people like the CMC chairwoman who give up so easily. I'm not sure what the middle ground is - maybe Nixon? You resist for a while, then you give up. And in return, we let you "retire" with some semblance of dignity. Or you resist for a while, the attacks fade away, and you live to fight another day. Seems fair to me.
archagon 11y ago
Say what you will about the situation, but every time something like this happens, I end up being far more aghast at the reactions (see the article comments) than the original incident. It's really gross and a good indicator for why these flare-ups keep happening.

211 points by zabramow 11y ago

These intellectually bankrupt movements horrify me. Perfectly-well-meaning people, while supposedly building a bright tomorrow, create hell. Just like the 1950s Czechoslovakia. University execs scared not to cater to idiotic demands, public shaming, double-speak, government-sanctioned kangaroo courts. It's like Lord of the Flies II: The College Years. I would like to know if the Hitler Jugend were like this, too?

richmarr 11y ago
Not disagreeing, I find this whole situation bizarre, but do you mind sharing some of your reasoning?
- rdancer 11y ago
  > Perfectly-well-meaning people, while supposedly building a bright tomorrow, create hell. Just like the 1950s Czechoslovakia. University execs scared not to cater to idiotic demands, public shaming, double-speak, government-sanctioned kangaroo courts. After WWII, the Czechoslovak communists were faced with the problem of replacing the management of literally the whole country's public sector, as well as the newly nationalized formerly private sector, with people loyal to the new Republic. This meant no Nazi or Western collaborators, this meant purges. A lot of good people were chewed up, some died in prison or were executed. In the universities that had been closed since shortly after the beginning of the war, the students were allowed to take over, and run the administration, and later conduct the purges. This gave tremendous responsibility to people who had no qualification, no training, no life experience; and also tremendous power to people who by bribery or false testimony leveraged the system for personal gain or revenge. These drumhead hearings were not dissimilar to the Title IX hearings that take place on the campuses today. Here also are people with inappropriate training, perjury is rampant, the verdict is swift, but can it really be called just? Read Kundera's The Joke[1] (also a 1968 movie), for a good illustration of the absurdity of it all. The protagonist sends a letter to his girlfriend with a joke regarding something or other. She finds the joke offensive, shares her concern with some of her colleagues, a hearing is called, and our protagonist finds himself kicked out of the university, and branded politically unreliable. This means he can barely get the worst of jobs, and will in fact be forced to work in a penal colony for a few years. Never having been convicted of a crime, never having been given the opportunity to defend himself in a court of law. Because of a joke. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Joke_(novel) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Joke_(novel)
  - defen 11y ago
    Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences. Since this is the internet I'll note that I'm being sarcastic, and attempting to demonstrate the intellectual bankruptcy of such a statement, which we hear all the time when these sorts of things happen.
    - gliese1337 11y ago
      Uh, yeah, actually it does. Not all consequences, but some very specific and very important ones. That's the entire legal definition of "freedom of speech"- that actions actions cannot be taken against you to restrict your freedom to say what you want, nor to punish you after the fact. When such restrictions or punishments are in place, you are not, in fact, free to speak. Now private universities, for example, not being governmental institutions, are not required by the constitution to guarantee free speech rights within their domain. But there are good reasons why that right was encoded in the constitution to limit the power of our national government, and they apply just as well to the governing bodies of universities and other private institutions.
      - dmix 11y ago
        Universities and private institutions lack the check on that power that the government has with the judicial system. So even a policy of ardent free speech in these institutions would be on weak ground without a system to accuse or appeal misjudgment by the power holders. The best system they have is public discourse... the media or internet, But modern corporate media, much like University administrators, have demonstrated to be extremely unwilling to offend anybody. They rarely take a strong stances towards freedom of speech, preferring to appease via resignations and public apologies. Additionally if Reddit is any indication the internet is not a great place for thoughtful political discussion.
    - rdancer 11y ago
      I'm afraid sarcasm is often lost on our more zealous comrades.
randomname2 11y ago
Indeed history repeating itself. Book burning started on college campuses as well. Not necessarily the Hitler Jugend, but Fascism was also considered an "intellectual movement" in its heydays, very popular on college campuses with perfectly well-meaning people.
- _delirium 11y ago
  I don't think you're correct on that point historically. Fascism was mainly a lower-class phenomenon, not really rooted in universities or intellectuals. There were certainly a handful of intellectuals who did align with it (esoteric pagan types in the Völkisch movement, some racial theorists, and a handful of philosophers), but it wasn't their main base. For one thing, German universities at the time had a quite large proportion of Jewish faculty and students, who for obvious reasons were not sympathetic to the Nazis. And even the right-wing part of the intellectual milieu mostly aligned with the older conservative parties, not with the Nazis, who they saw as uncouth rabble. As a result, the Nazis had to impose themselves on universities against considerable resistance, and to do so had to fire a large proportion of the faculty, and then appoint a bunch of its own functionaries to replace them. There's a reason Hitler gave speeches in places like beer halls, not the University of Munich.
  - vlehto 11y ago
    Fascism and Nazism are not the same thing. Nazism is subset of Fascism. Which is lot more international phenomena. And it has had limited support in various places. My home country fostered few Fascists movements before and during WWII. One of them included lots of people from academia. While curiously there is no mention anywhere that they would have persecuted domestic ethnic minorities. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriotic_People's_Movement_%28Finland%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriotic_People's_Movement_%2...

tptacek 11y ago

Above all, we are disappointed that you and President Chodosh weren’t brave enough to come to the defense of a student who was told she was “derailing” because her opinions regarding racism didn’t align with those of the mob around her. Nor were you brave enough to point out that these protesters were perfectly happy to use this student to further their own agenda, but turned on her as soon as they realized she wasn’t supporting their narrative. These protesters were asking you to protect your students, but you didn’t even defend the one who needed to be protected right in front of you. It's like nobody on any side of any of these university free speech issues can keep themselves on the rails. These people don't seem to get it either. Students don't need "protection" from free speech, nor does anyone need to be rescued from the "mockery" and "humiliation" of an accusation of racism. Demands for journalism-free "safe spaces" are bad, but so too is the idea that accusations of racism are so beyond the pale that people need to be shielded from them by institutions.

posnet 11y ago
Sure, its not the institutions role to protect accusations of racism. But watch the video yourself and make a judgement on who, if anyone was being racist. (Ignore the inflammatory title, this is the best one I can find) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8UTj8lQJhY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8UTj8lQJhY
- tptacek 11y ago
  Who cares if "they're" the racists? It's always the same thing, both on the protester's side and the institution, stretching back years: someone does something dumb, and someone else overreacts.
  - posnet 11y ago
    I didn't say anyone was. I don't think anyone was being racist in the video. I was just trying to provide context to the paragraph you quoted in case you hadn't seen the video.
  - gozo 11y ago

hackuser 11y ago

Just a thought for those trying to figure out what's going on: If you find what the protest movements are doing to be challenging, that's the idea. Much social change begins this way; it's like disruption in tech. People find the whole idea of it challenging to their worldview and comfortable status quo, and they (we) respond predictably - angry, scared, dimissive. It's heresy. But if the status quo worked so well, we wouldn't need social change. In some cases, people get the idea and come around and what was heresy becomes the new status quo (for the next generation to up end, upsetting the current protestors when they are older and settled). It's similar to early adoption of disruptive technology. That doesn't make every disruptive idea, socially or in tech, good, but the fact that it disrupts your social ideas is not, in itself, problematic. For myself, when I feel myself responding that way, I try to take it as a sign that there's something beyond my perspective that I don't understand.

wfo 11y ago
I would agree it seems our normal methods to deal with, say institutionalized racism have failed. This method seems to be to publicly abuse, harass, and destroy the lives of anyone who dares step outside the social justice orthodoxy even for a moment. This isn't disruptive or new, it is a mob ruling by fear and rolling over any attempt to pause and think and be reasonable, as old as human history and as distasteful.
BoxFour 11y ago
Caveat: This is a response to a more general concept, not necessarily applicable to this particular issue > Much social change begins this way Much social change also DOESN'T begin this way (see: OWS), and it can be frustrating for people who agree with the underlying principles behind protests but think the execution is disheartening and misguided. Especially because these kinds of movements tend to be the story that gets told: People with thoughtful dissents get eclipsed by the more vociferous and extreme (one could argue that this is because extremes tend to be better fodder for the media). > For myself, when I feel myself responding that way, I try to take it as a sign that there's something beyond my perspective that I don't understand. I think that's a somewhat simplistic view of it. It's entirely possible to understand and have a developed perspective of an idea, and to still reject it - sometimes vehemently. Sure, some disruptive ideas are very challenging and ultimately end up being a good thing. The vast majority are not, though. Sometimes those disruptive ideas are detrimental, and it's not hard to see why people get angry when those detrimental effects start surfacing in visible ways (e.g. anti-vaccination).

kelukelugames 11y ago

The main criticism is that Dean Spellman referred to a marginalized student as "not fitting the [Claremont Mckenna] mold". This is harmful. It is more than a poor choice of words. She should have apologized and done some training. But the students are young and have no where else to direct their frustration. I hope Spellman can land on her feet. And I hope minority students can feel less marginalized on campus.

001sky 11y ago
I'd disagree, completely. Its just shitty english grammer. The notion that somone might not "fit [a] mold", is a trivial comment. The implication that if someone mis-states this comment as saying someone might not "fit [the] mold" is simply the substitution of the definite for the indefinite article. Put another way, there is no "literal" truth to the comment. There is not [a] mold; nor are there [any] molds that exist (in the literal sense) at any college. That whole expression is a figue of speech. TLRD--this whole thing is about a fucking typo in an e-mail.
- kelukelugames 11y ago
  I hope you don't disagree completely with wishing Spellman luck in finding another job and the students being in a better place too. ;) Of course Spellman didn't intend to hurt, but leaders should have more situational awareness. I wish people here had empathy for the students. Being a minority in this country can be hard. They are not upset because of a single grammar mistake. They've experienced dozens of slights and want the campus administrators to be more aware. For example, here is a video of the Ithaca incident: [1]. The panelists had a tone deaf moment due to a poor choice of words, and it's a moment that any of us could have had. Of course, if you think it's 100% okay to refer to black people as savages then we won't ever find any common ground. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-QNeQR3WAg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-QNeQR3WAg PS Look for the guy in the green shirt at the end of the video.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]

seibelj 11y ago

I wrote a long argument but deleted it all in favor of this. Everyone needs to toughen the fuck up and stop being offended so easily. Someone insults you for being different? Welcome to real life, get some thicker skin.

mingus68040 11y ago
Right. In that case I'm sure you'll understand if I tell you to fuck right off.
- 001sky 11y ago
  You're not even clever enough to insult
  - mingus68040 11y ago
    What's wrong? Skin too thin? Maybe you should toughen up.
    - 001sky 11y ago
      --Says puppet account, with lifetime negative karma
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
__derek__ 11y ago
That's a very easy thing to say from a place of privilege, with current and historical institutions set up to protect and enforce your (and my) interests. Edit: Here, I'll put it better: by telling people from historically disadvantaged groups to buck up and be quiet, you're effectively saying, "I reject your understanding of your experiences, so your perspective is invalid."
- jnbiche 11y ago

nugget 11y ago

These protestors just hurt themselves in the long run. That's the saddest part. ''The arc of the moral universe is long but it bends toward justice.'' Yes, and we all have a moral obligation to stand up to injustices that we see. But embracing victimhood as an identity does nothing for you. It keeps you stuck where you are and unable to move forward. You start to mistake pity for respect. University administrators are doing them a huge disservice by making them think otherwise. In the lion and tiger filled jungle of the real world they are in for a rude awakening. Marcus Aurelius, writing two thousand years ago: "Our actions may be impeded, but there can be no impeding our intentions or dispositions. Because we can accommodate and adapt. The mind adapts and converts to its own purposes the obstacle to our acting. The impediment to action advances action. What stands in the way becomes the way." I wish I had more than one upvote to give this editorial.

joesmo 11y ago

I wonder what these students will think when they get into an industry like software programming that's full of racism and sexism that they have no control over (if they manage to get past those obstacles to get in in the first place). They are doing themselves a disservice by not learning how to deal not only with people who hold different opinions than they do, but also with people who are blatantly racist, sexist, or just plain assholes. While the rest of us are trying to deal with the real issue of the loss of free speech due to surveillance and censorship by authorities, they're contributing in their own little ways the final blows to a free society, a contribution undoubtedly much lauded by the traditional enemy of free speech, the state. And in return, they make absolutely no positive difference to the status quo whatsoever. Even the hunger strikes are cute. A reminiscence of Ghandi? Seriously? It take a lot longer than a week to die of starvation and I doubt any of those students have the resolve to see a hunger strike out. The dean bowed down to cowardice by being a coward herself so it's clear she's not cut out for the job. I wonder if there are still people who are cut out for it? As far as the issue of "safe space," if these students think such a thing actually exists, they're too stupid to be attending college. A better admissions process should weed them out.

quonn 11y ago
> when they get into an industry like software programming that's full of racism and sexism Is it like that in the US? Really? Especially when compared to other professions. I do not know, but I have serious doubts. Please enlighten me.
- gkop 11y ago
  It depends who you ask. From my vantage point, sexism is thankfully and rightfully getting increasing attention in recent years in the software/tech sector, but still persists widely. Unfortunately America is still full of racism, including in software development, and so far tech has done very little whatsoever to heed the problem. I can't answer your last question, I don't know if tech is any more bigoted than other professions, my career has been exclusively in tech.
- joesmo 11y ago

twelfthnight 11y ago

In high school, I had a teacher who had a rack of books/comics which he lent to students. One day, a single student complained about curse words / nudity in some of the books, and the teacher was forced to take those books out of the school. This struck me as silly. Why let one person's complaint take away this great thing for all of the students? Also in high school, there was a girl who was into hard core music and died her hair blue. She was routinely mocked in the halls for being weird. This also struck me as silly. Why should a person, just because they have a minority interest / opinion, be forced to deal with such harassment? I'm empathetic to both sides of this issue. However, I think we should generally err on the side of not harassing people, even if that causes unnecessary inconveniences for the majority sometimes.

rdancer 11y ago
I don't think you're making your point very well: Being forced not to bully Bluelocks does not inconvenience you. Having the opportunity (not obligation) to read something you don't want to read does not inconvenience you either. If anything, we should, in a secular state, agree that people differ in their view of morality, and we should be tolerant of each other's needs, perceived or otherwise.
- iamsohungry 11y ago
  > If anything, we should, in a secular state, agree that people differ in their view of morality, and we should be tolerant of each other's needs, perceived or otherwise. The problem is that some people's perceived needs are not compatible with other people's perceived needs. In order to decide which group gets their perceived needs, I think it makes sense to have a societal conversation about which of those perceived needs are actual needs, and which of those perceived needs are just wants.
- hackuser 11y ago
  > I don't think you're making your point very well This is unnecessary. Please just make your point without criticizing the author.
deleted 11y ago

hackuser 11y ago

The best place to start understanding social protest and its disruptive approach (not unlike the disruption practiced by many in SV) is Martin Luther King's Letter From a Birmingham Jail. I recommend the whole thing, but here are excerpts [1] -------- 16 April 1963 My Dear Fellow Clergymen: While confined here in the Birmingham city jail, I came across your recent statement calling my present activities "unwise and untimely." ... You deplore the demonstrations taking place in Birmingham. But your statement, I am sorry to say, fails to express a similar concern for the conditions that brought about the demonstrations. ... My friends, I must say to you that we have not made a single gain in civil rights without determined legal and nonviolent pressure. Lamentably, it is an historical fact that privileged groups seldom give up their privileges voluntarily. Individuals may see the moral light and voluntarily give up their unjust posture; but, as Reinhold Niebuhr has reminded us, groups tend to be more immoral than individuals. ... Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored. ... I must confess that I am not afraid of the word "tension." I have earnestly opposed violent tension, but there is a type of constructive, nonviolent tension which is necessary for growth. Just as Socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the mind so that individuals could rise from the bondage of myths and half truths to the unfettered realm of creative analysis and objective appraisal ... I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection. -------- [1] http://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.html http://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.h...

drumdance 11y ago

Shivetya 11y ago

Sorry, but this whole college uprising is way too coordinated and the idea of personal space/safe space, college costs, and the like, are just political staging for the 2016 election similar to how OWS was for 2012. Its all backed by groups with connections to political players who need to energize this group as the candidate they will be stuck with is damaged and boring goods. Figure the focus of one campaign will simply be "fixing" college, from how students are coddled to offering to pay for it all. Just watch.

vlehto 11y ago
I've got even more exiting theory for you. What if GOP and Democrats are ruling together? Let the people argue about guns, abortion, racism etc. Meanwhile Clinton-Bush coalition is agreeing on corporate welfare, monetary policy and military expeditions. If they ever get caught, it's just "working over the aisle". If that doesn't fly, just swap representatives. Add infinitum, because no third challenging party could ever appear in such seemingly polarized political environment.
scarmig 11y ago
That's pretty conspiratorially-minded. Hillary Clinton's campaign, to the extent it has an opinion, would prefer these mini-conflagrations simply not happen during the election year. They do nothing except inflame the Republican base and alienate everyone except a small subset of student and Tumblr activists. Their very existence suggests that sooner or later she'll have to engage with the topic, which is a negative sum game for the Democratic candidate compared to yelling about how crazy the Republican candidates are.

hackuser 11y ago

Here's a perspective on why the protesters seem to dislike news media coverage. (I'll add that there is much criticism here with little investigation of the actual facts and assertions of the protesters. I'm not trying to take a side, but to add some substance to the discussion.) "There’s a good reason protesters at the University of Missouri didn’t want the media around" https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/11/11/theres-a-good-reason-protesters-at-the-university-of-missouri-didnt-want-the-media-around/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/11/11/... Certainly, Tai - like any journalist - had a legal right to enter the space, given that it was in a public area. But that shouldn’t be the end of this story. We in the media have something important to learn from this unfortunate exchange. The protesters had a legitimate gripe: The black community distrusts the news media because it has failed to cover black pain fairly. ... I've read plenty, for many years, that corroborates this point of view.

facepalm 11y ago
You could formulate that in a more straightforward way: people don't want stuff they disagree with being written in the newspaper.
- rdancer 11y ago
  people don't want to be libelled in the newspaper
  - Jeema101 11y ago
    Opinion is not libel.
    - rdancer 11y ago
      You're correct. Defamation set in print is libel.

pducks32 11y ago

I just wanted to say that I was reading the comments here and it hit me that this is the Internet I love. So often we talk about dialogue and having a conversation and I really believe the Internet is perfect for that because its hard to raise your voice on the Internet and silence someone else, but we rarely get it because—for example—Facebook isn't very threaded and you have your name attached and are only having a conversation with your "friends" so its insular. On the other side is Reddit where charged things like this just don't work well. However on HN people write thoughtful, dissenting, sourced, and well-written arguments and we have full discussions. It's fantastic. This is the Internet I love.

rrauenza 11y ago

Reminds me of the warnings in this article http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/09/the-coddling-of-the-american-mind/399356/ http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/09/the-codd...

javajosh 11y ago

I like it. I stand by and watch some leaders stubbornly refuse any culpability at all no matter how universal the detractors, and other leaders crumble at the first sign of frission. Clearly both are extreme reactions, and problematic. I (we?) want leaders who don't pull a GW Bush and stick their fingers in their ears for all criticism. We also don't want people like the CMC chairwoman who give up so easily. I'm not sure what the middle ground is - maybe Nixon? You resist for a while, then you give up. And in return, we let you "retire" with some semblance of dignity. Or you resist for a while, the attacks fade away, and you live to fight another day. Seems fair to me.

archagon 11y ago

Say what you will about the situation, but every time something like this happens, I end up being far more aghast at the reactions (see the article comments) than the original incident. It's really gross and a good indicator for why these flare-ups keep happening.