6 ms·

I don't believe so, no. DePaul claimed they blocked Shapiro from speaking due to "security concerns"[0]. In particular, students in favor of safe spaces and tr

by judah 10y ago

I don't believe so, no. DePaul claimed they blocked Shapiro from speaking due to "security concerns"[0]. In particular, students in favor of safe spaces and trigger warnings threatened to riot, block the doors, and prevent student access to the event. DePaul capitulated to this bullying by banning Shapiro. Related: California State University-Los Angeles planned on hosting Shapiro to speak, but demanded[1] the student group which invited him to pay $600 to the university in security fees. When the student group refused, the university blocked his speech. I'm not aware of this happening to speakers holding majority political viewpoint; it affects the minority viewpoints primarily. Frame it in terms of race: imagine a modern campus saying, "We allow blacks to speak, but only if they pay hundreds of dollars to provide security against the white riots that will inevitably arise." [0]: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/aug/1/ben-shapiro-banned-from-depaul-university-over-sec/ http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/aug/1/ben-shapiro-b... [1]: http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/26367/ http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/26367/

Larrikin 10y ago
Do you believe that speakers of hate speech should be allowed on campus? I think theres a big difference between speakers you disagree with and the former. I'm a grad student at DePaul at the loop campus so I don't really follow much of what is going on with the undergrads at the main campus, but it seems to me that the administration is taking a hard stance because of people like Milo who are mostly there for shock effect and not because they are saying anything of substance. His speech was successfully protested and he wasn't invited back.
- ericras 10y ago
  > Do you believe that speakers of hate speech... Who gets to create the definition of 'hate speech'? You, I assume? > ...and not because they are saying anything of substance. Because he's not substantive to you and people who agree with you, right? Free speech is great as long as it's within acceptable boundaries!
- ctlby 10y ago
  > I think theres a big difference between speakers you disagree with and the former. There is zero difference. "Hate speech" is a phrase invented by modern progressives to describe disagreeable views. It has zero meaning outside of pop liberal circles.
  - nl 10y ago
    "Hate speech" is a phrase invented by modern progressives to describe disagreeable views. I'm not entirely familiar with the US usage of the term, but that doesn't seem right to me. The pre-WW2 British Public Order Act (1936) was enacted to stop attacks by British Facists on Jews, and part of it was a ban on the "use [of] threatening and abusive words"[1] It has zero meaning outside of pop liberal circles That certainly isn't true. In many countries there are laws against it[2] [1] http://spartacus-educational.com/Lpublic.htm http://spartacus-educational.com/Lpublic.htm [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech
    - michaelbuddy 10y ago
      Yeah and ask yourself what merit does Germany have when making a negative comment about islam on a social network will get you a visit and possible fine or jail time. This is thought crime and it's NOT the right direction for the world to go.
      - nl 10y ago
        I don't think I made any comment about its utility?
    - ctlby 10y ago
      Good point, my statement is specific to the US.
- tomohawk 10y ago
  That's a pretty strong accusation. If you're going to label someone as a hater, at least provide some references. Otherwise, you come across as the hater, with at least the appearance of making baseless claims.
- r_smart 10y ago
  Have you ever listened to Ben Shapiro? That the content of his talks can be labeled as hate speech is the very problem with the idea of having hate speech be a thing. It rapidly becomes "Anything that disagrees with the majority, regardless of facts."

by judah 10y ago

Larrikin 10y ago

Do you believe that speakers of hate speech should be allowed on campus? I think theres a big difference between speakers you disagree with and the former. I'm a grad student at DePaul at the loop campus so I don't really follow much of what is going on with the undergrads at the main campus, but it seems to me that the administration is taking a hard stance because of people like Milo who are mostly there for shock effect and not because they are saying anything of substance. His speech was successfully protested and he wasn't invited back.

ericras 10y ago
> Do you believe that speakers of hate speech... Who gets to create the definition of 'hate speech'? You, I assume? > ...and not because they are saying anything of substance. Because he's not substantive to you and people who agree with you, right? Free speech is great as long as it's within acceptable boundaries!
ctlby 10y ago
> I think theres a big difference between speakers you disagree with and the former. There is zero difference. "Hate speech" is a phrase invented by modern progressives to describe disagreeable views. It has zero meaning outside of pop liberal circles.
- nl 10y ago
  "Hate speech" is a phrase invented by modern progressives to describe disagreeable views. I'm not entirely familiar with the US usage of the term, but that doesn't seem right to me. The pre-WW2 British Public Order Act (1936) was enacted to stop attacks by British Facists on Jews, and part of it was a ban on the "use [of] threatening and abusive words"[1] It has zero meaning outside of pop liberal circles That certainly isn't true. In many countries there are laws against it[2] [1] http://spartacus-educational.com/Lpublic.htm http://spartacus-educational.com/Lpublic.htm [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech
  - michaelbuddy 10y ago
    Yeah and ask yourself what merit does Germany have when making a negative comment about islam on a social network will get you a visit and possible fine or jail time. This is thought crime and it's NOT the right direction for the world to go.
    - nl 10y ago
      I don't think I made any comment about its utility?
  - ctlby 10y ago
    Good point, my statement is specific to the US.
tomohawk 10y ago
That's a pretty strong accusation. If you're going to label someone as a hater, at least provide some references. Otherwise, you come across as the hater, with at least the appearance of making baseless claims.
r_smart 10y ago
Have you ever listened to Ben Shapiro? That the content of his talks can be labeled as hate speech is the very problem with the idea of having hate speech be a thing. It rapidly becomes "Anything that disagrees with the majority, regardless of facts."