11 ms·

I see this as an outgrowth of left-liberal student bodies clamping down on conservative speech on college campuses. If leftist students can block Ann Coulter fr

I see this as an outgrowth of left-liberal student bodies clamping down on conservative speech on college campuses. If leftist students can block Ann Coulter from speaking then why can't Chinese students block the Dalai Lama? Every speech is guaranteed to offend someone and that's verboten in today's campuses. As a libertarian, I was always worried about this and it was a main reason why I opposed social justice warriors. Sadly, our fear has come to pass and censorship now reigns in universities. In the future, children's fairytales will be the only safe topic to discuss.

ggggtez 9y ago
Your entry sounds like a fairy tale... And I don't think it's worth discussion.
- sctb 9y ago
  Please comment civilly and substantively on Hacker News or not at all. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
swang 9y ago
give me a break. left, right, _anytime_ there is a controversial figure on either side there will be opposition from the polar opposite side. but sure, don't mention the times people on the "left" wanted to speak and were threaten and harmed by the "other side"
- trendia 9y ago
  If the left tries to block the right, and the right blocks the left, the Chinese the anti-Chinese..... soon nobody will be allowed to speak.
  - rubatuga 9y ago
    Lmfao, and then we become a perfect society where nobody talks, seems quite pleasant to me /s
    - echaozh 9y ago
      At least you the blocking is of the people, by the people and for the people. Rather than by a dictator. So much better.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
bdhe 9y ago
Between the laughable analogy comparing Ann Coulter to the Dalai Lama and an argument evoking a strawman SJW, it's not clear if you're here to discuss things in good faith. Your hyperbole doesn't help your argument either. What topic of discussion do you fear having a discourse about?
- sillysaurus3 9y ago
  You can't accuse people of commenting in bad faith when you simply disagree with their comment. Please don't call names ("laughable" "hyperbolic argument" "you're here in bad faith".) If you cut everything except your last sentence, the result is a good comment.
  - Retric 9y ago
    I disagree, if the KKK puts on a protest today they are not doing to block shit. Protests have power with they are backed up by commen sentiment and nobody opposes them. But, attention is fractal in nature so if only some subgroup cares about an issue the same rules apply to that sub group.
- nyolfen 9y ago
  sorry, but i think he's totally correct and it's a good faith comparison. they're both speakers that have been subject to offended parties try to shut down their speeches. there's no reason besides base tribalism to think one is appropriate to shut down and the other isn't. the principle of free speech is why we should allow both to speak publicly, as well as any detractors who wish to protest.
unityByFreedom 9y ago
> If leftist students can block Ann Coulter from speaking then why can't Chinese students block the Dalai Lama? Students actually don't have a right to forcibly block speakers. That's a common misconception of free speech. If you want to see examples of how real free speech is upheld, check out cases on thefire.org [1]. It's a law firm that specializes in tackling free speech issues on college campuses. However, they can't take a case without a plaintiff. So, if one group protests and succeeds in blocking some speaker, the burden is still on the victimized group to file a lawsuit. As they say, freedom isn't free, and you need to fight to keep it. [1] https://www.thefire.org/category/cases/free-speech/ https://www.thefire.org/category/cases/free-speech/
- mistermann 9y ago
  It isn't a legal right, it is a de facto right. Generally speaking, only left leaning speakers are allowed on campuses. Generally speaking, only pro-immigration speech is allowed in polite company. This story, at least to me, also illustrates Chinese immigrants aren't interested in immigrating to other countries because they like the culture, way of life, etc and are choosing them as a new home to raise their families (well, this is part of it of course), but perhaps even unbeknownst to themselves, they have a strong intention to modify their host cultures into a form more like what they are used to.
  - Harimwakairi 9y ago
    > Generally speaking, only left leaning speakers are allowed on campuses. No. Just no. While American college campuses tend to skew left, they are not fortresses of liberalism where everyone duckspeaks about Bernie Sanders. They all have conservative professors, Young Republicans clubs, and so on. Hell, part of my large, public university tuition money went to pay a 50k speaking fee to Alberto Gonzales, ffs.
    - mistermann 9y ago
      When the riots and shouting over top of conservative speakers so they can't be heard stops, then I will concede that I was wrong, until then, I consider you wrong. Freedom of speech used to be inalienable as a matter of principle, now the majority of college students vehemently oppose it. That is a fact.
bhouston 9y ago
It has nothing really do to with that. Chinese government doesn't care about left wing American students and what they think. It is just doing what it can to promote its message, like it has been doing for decades.
- PakG1 9y ago
  I think gp is saying that the first action legitimizes the second by setting precedent, so it's difficult to call the second action illegitimate.
- nyolfen 9y ago
  the chinese government may not care what left wing american students have to say, but if those students establish a precedent that speakers deemed 'offensive' can be shut down solely for that reason, then the groundwork is laid for parties who _aren't_ left wing students to abuse that precedent as well. this is why we must defend the principle of free speech even when we disagree with the speakers.
- kccqzy 9y ago
  I think the GP meant that the Chinese government can in fact promote its message because it is free speech.
koolba 9y ago
I'm sure someone will eventually object to the negative portrayals of witches in fairy tales. There's no safe topics once you give in to this direction.
mintplant 9y ago
First off, who would you include in "left-liberal", "leftist", and "social justice warriors"? These terms all mean different things to different people. "Liberal" in the American sense or the traditional sense? Do you group anarchists, communists, and sociaists into "left-liberal"? Do you consider Democrats to be "leftists"? I won't bother addressing the amorphous idea of a "social justice warrior". Your interchangeable use of these terms suggests a general boogeyman whose beliefs don't match your own. Secondly, I happened to be in university right now, and I can attest that the idea of campuses being overtaken by "censorship" has been blown far out of proportion in the press. Religious fundamentalist groups regularly set up shop on the main thoroughfare to propagandize; one even put up a gigantic wall of very graphic abortion photos. The university isn't coming to kick them out as their expression is protected. Students tend to gather around and heckle/argue with them, and their expression is also protected. In another incident, the Hispanic services center and other areas of campus were chalked with slogans like "Build The Wall" the night before an annual event for prospective students and their families: extremely embarrassing for the school, and widely condemned, but there was no retaliation against those responsible as, again, their expression is protected and no permanent damage was done. I'm aware the plural of anecdote isn't "data", but stories like this remind me of other pumped-up "kids these days" moral crises like the D&D scare of a few decades ago.
- candiodari 9y ago
  When the law department attempted to get a representative of the white house to speak about public service (something they do every year, for obvious reasons), the aula got locked down with chains and students prevented anyone from coming there. Why ? Well "not my president" was one of the signs. Needless to say, the students blocking the aula were not law students and since they made it clear they would disrupt any attempt to change the venue, the talk was canceled. VERY disappointing I must say. You don't like who's gotten elected ? Let's obstruct the futures of your co-students because it might help them. This seems to be the norm now. And yes, it was rescheduled, the venue was changed to a downtown hotel, and there was a "covert" announcement of the new arrangement. I hear the hotel owner even gave the venue and the drinks for free in support of free expression.
- WillPostForFood 9y ago
natch 9y ago
Pretty sure it was the university administration, not the student body, that said the Ann Coulter event wouldn't happen. And I believe this happened because at previous events clashes between protestors on both sides, right and left (or all sides if you prefer) had turned violent. And since then the university has changed its decision. Also I don't think we know that the protestors were students. Although it's reasonable to think that at least some of them might have been. To me it's far more interesting to look at the Chinese students associations as a phenomenon with a longer history, predating the recent free speech brouhahas. The groups have been around since at least the early 1980s and are staffed by brainwashed zealots who were raised in a country where the official school curriculum teaches them things that are simply false (edit: as does ours too (US) but in China it is at an entirely different level), and media is tightly controlled to the point that journalists sometimes just disappear. The liberals in the US are more in line with the thinking: "tolerate everything but intolerance," so you see them react strongly when intolerant people try to spread intolerance. It's hard for some people to wrap their head around the seemingly contradictory idea of not tolerating intolerance... you may be one of those people. But the Chinese folks are an entirely different thing, imho. They are complicated (due to national pride coupled with a huge chip on the shoulder from their history of getting surpassed in the last century) but suffice it to say they have a very rigid line of thinking about things they were force fed from an early age, and this goes way back.
- taobility 9y ago
  All you talking about really hilarious. The Chinese students' protest has nothing related with Chinese government, all these is assumed by NYT. There are lots of political related protests in US campus, like protesting against Milo Yiannopoulos was supported by Hilary?! In NYT's point, all Chinese students are dumb, and they are brainwashed by Chinese government, and controlled by the gov. So, their protest is remote controlled by the gov. Really?

ggggtez 9y ago

Your entry sounds like a fairy tale... And I don't think it's worth discussion.

sctb 9y ago
Please comment civilly and substantively on Hacker News or not at all. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

swang 9y ago

give me a break. left, right, _anytime_ there is a controversial figure on either side there will be opposition from the polar opposite side. but sure, don't mention the times people on the "left" wanted to speak and were threaten and harmed by the "other side"

trendia 9y ago
If the left tries to block the right, and the right blocks the left, the Chinese the anti-Chinese..... soon nobody will be allowed to speak.
- rubatuga 9y ago
  Lmfao, and then we become a perfect society where nobody talks, seems quite pleasant to me /s
  - echaozh 9y ago
    At least you the blocking is of the people, by the people and for the people. Rather than by a dictator. So much better.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

bdhe 9y ago

Between the laughable analogy comparing Ann Coulter to the Dalai Lama and an argument evoking a strawman SJW, it's not clear if you're here to discuss things in good faith. Your hyperbole doesn't help your argument either. What topic of discussion do you fear having a discourse about?

sillysaurus3 9y ago
You can't accuse people of commenting in bad faith when you simply disagree with their comment. Please don't call names ("laughable" "hyperbolic argument" "you're here in bad faith".) If you cut everything except your last sentence, the result is a good comment.
- Retric 9y ago
  I disagree, if the KKK puts on a protest today they are not doing to block shit. Protests have power with they are backed up by commen sentiment and nobody opposes them. But, attention is fractal in nature so if only some subgroup cares about an issue the same rules apply to that sub group.
nyolfen 9y ago
sorry, but i think he's totally correct and it's a good faith comparison. they're both speakers that have been subject to offended parties try to shut down their speeches. there's no reason besides base tribalism to think one is appropriate to shut down and the other isn't. the principle of free speech is why we should allow both to speak publicly, as well as any detractors who wish to protest.

unityByFreedom 9y ago

> If leftist students can block Ann Coulter from speaking then why can't Chinese students block the Dalai Lama? Students actually don't have a right to forcibly block speakers. That's a common misconception of free speech. If you want to see examples of how real free speech is upheld, check out cases on thefire.org [1]. It's a law firm that specializes in tackling free speech issues on college campuses. However, they can't take a case without a plaintiff. So, if one group protests and succeeds in blocking some speaker, the burden is still on the victimized group to file a lawsuit. As they say, freedom isn't free, and you need to fight to keep it. [1] https://www.thefire.org/category/cases/free-speech/ https://www.thefire.org/category/cases/free-speech/

mistermann 9y ago
It isn't a legal right, it is a de facto right. Generally speaking, only left leaning speakers are allowed on campuses. Generally speaking, only pro-immigration speech is allowed in polite company. This story, at least to me, also illustrates Chinese immigrants aren't interested in immigrating to other countries because they like the culture, way of life, etc and are choosing them as a new home to raise their families (well, this is part of it of course), but perhaps even unbeknownst to themselves, they have a strong intention to modify their host cultures into a form more like what they are used to.
- Harimwakairi 9y ago
  > Generally speaking, only left leaning speakers are allowed on campuses. No. Just no. While American college campuses tend to skew left, they are not fortresses of liberalism where everyone duckspeaks about Bernie Sanders. They all have conservative professors, Young Republicans clubs, and so on. Hell, part of my large, public university tuition money went to pay a 50k speaking fee to Alberto Gonzales, ffs.
  - mistermann 9y ago
    When the riots and shouting over top of conservative speakers so they can't be heard stops, then I will concede that I was wrong, until then, I consider you wrong. Freedom of speech used to be inalienable as a matter of principle, now the majority of college students vehemently oppose it. That is a fact.

bhouston 9y ago

It has nothing really do to with that. Chinese government doesn't care about left wing American students and what they think. It is just doing what it can to promote its message, like it has been doing for decades.

PakG1 9y ago
I think gp is saying that the first action legitimizes the second by setting precedent, so it's difficult to call the second action illegitimate.
nyolfen 9y ago
the chinese government may not care what left wing american students have to say, but if those students establish a precedent that speakers deemed 'offensive' can be shut down solely for that reason, then the groundwork is laid for parties who _aren't_ left wing students to abuse that precedent as well. this is why we must defend the principle of free speech even when we disagree with the speakers.
kccqzy 9y ago
I think the GP meant that the Chinese government can in fact promote its message because it is free speech.

koolba 9y ago

I'm sure someone will eventually object to the negative portrayals of witches in fairy tales. There's no safe topics once you give in to this direction.

mintplant 9y ago

First off, who would you include in "left-liberal", "leftist", and "social justice warriors"? These terms all mean different things to different people. "Liberal" in the American sense or the traditional sense? Do you group anarchists, communists, and sociaists into "left-liberal"? Do you consider Democrats to be "leftists"? I won't bother addressing the amorphous idea of a "social justice warrior". Your interchangeable use of these terms suggests a general boogeyman whose beliefs don't match your own. Secondly, I happened to be in university right now, and I can attest that the idea of campuses being overtaken by "censorship" has been blown far out of proportion in the press. Religious fundamentalist groups regularly set up shop on the main thoroughfare to propagandize; one even put up a gigantic wall of very graphic abortion photos. The university isn't coming to kick them out as their expression is protected. Students tend to gather around and heckle/argue with them, and their expression is also protected. In another incident, the Hispanic services center and other areas of campus were chalked with slogans like "Build The Wall" the night before an annual event for prospective students and their families: extremely embarrassing for the school, and widely condemned, but there was no retaliation against those responsible as, again, their expression is protected and no permanent damage was done. I'm aware the plural of anecdote isn't "data", but stories like this remind me of other pumped-up "kids these days" moral crises like the D&D scare of a few decades ago.

candiodari 9y ago
When the law department attempted to get a representative of the white house to speak about public service (something they do every year, for obvious reasons), the aula got locked down with chains and students prevented anyone from coming there. Why ? Well "not my president" was one of the signs. Needless to say, the students blocking the aula were not law students and since they made it clear they would disrupt any attempt to change the venue, the talk was canceled. VERY disappointing I must say. You don't like who's gotten elected ? Let's obstruct the futures of your co-students because it might help them. This seems to be the norm now. And yes, it was rescheduled, the venue was changed to a downtown hotel, and there was a "covert" announcement of the new arrangement. I hear the hotel owner even gave the venue and the drinks for free in support of free expression.
WillPostForFood 9y ago

natch 9y ago

Pretty sure it was the university administration, not the student body, that said the Ann Coulter event wouldn't happen. And I believe this happened because at previous events clashes between protestors on both sides, right and left (or all sides if you prefer) had turned violent. And since then the university has changed its decision. Also I don't think we know that the protestors were students. Although it's reasonable to think that at least some of them might have been. To me it's far more interesting to look at the Chinese students associations as a phenomenon with a longer history, predating the recent free speech brouhahas. The groups have been around since at least the early 1980s and are staffed by brainwashed zealots who were raised in a country where the official school curriculum teaches them things that are simply false (edit: as does ours too (US) but in China it is at an entirely different level), and media is tightly controlled to the point that journalists sometimes just disappear. The liberals in the US are more in line with the thinking: "tolerate everything but intolerance," so you see them react strongly when intolerant people try to spread intolerance. It's hard for some people to wrap their head around the seemingly contradictory idea of not tolerating intolerance... you may be one of those people. But the Chinese folks are an entirely different thing, imho. They are complicated (due to national pride coupled with a huge chip on the shoulder from their history of getting surpassed in the last century) but suffice it to say they have a very rigid line of thinking about things they were force fed from an early age, and this goes way back.

taobility 9y ago
All you talking about really hilarious. The Chinese students' protest has nothing related with Chinese government, all these is assumed by NYT. There are lots of political related protests in US campus, like protesting against Milo Yiannopoulos was supported by Hilary?! In NYT's point, all Chinese students are dumb, and they are brainwashed by Chinese government, and controlled by the gov. So, their protest is remote controlled by the gov. Really?