I'm scan reading the article and don't see what's so inflammatory about it either. It's about the problem of campus censorship and lack of free speech in unive

I'm scan reading the article and don't see what's so inflammatory about it either. It's about the problem of campus censorship and lack of free speech in universities. It starts by suggesting that Isaac Newton would have been pushed out of modern universities, if zapped forward in time, due to his mental issues and eccentric beliefs about non-gravity related topics. Then it goes on to argue that there's a thing called "neuro-diversity" and universities are only catering to the "neuro-typical". The "neuro-divergent" should stand up for their rights against oppression. This seems like a rather forced way to try and cast what campus politics is doing as discrimination in the hope that the people enforcing speech codes will think again. It's kind of an odd thesis - I can see where the author is going with that, not sure I agree but I don't clearly disagree either. I just doubt it's a good argument. Regardless, the only people who could describe this as inflammatory are people on the war path, who want to expel anyone who isn't 110% committed to their ideology of punishing speech that isn't sufficiently "progressive". Seems like another day, another Damore to me.