4 ms·

Can you please provide examples where you think fire should have stepped in? Universities are hardly right-wing institutions that fire academics for left-wing

Can you please provide examples where you think fire should have stepped in? Universities are hardly right-wing institutions that fire academics for left-wing research, quite to the contrary "academics" too often engage in indoctrination instead of teaching students to engage a subject to mastery. We are at such a bad point that even harvard is so stooped in dialectic that it argue 2+2 is not always 4, something an elementary kid knows is bullshit.

UncleMeat 5y ago
It'd reveal my identity. More broadly, these faculty members include researchers who work in: * climate science (death threats, widespread media attacks, attempts from politicians to cancel grants) * digital privacy (death threats) * history of policing (death threats, attacks from Hannity, attacks from the Hoover institute trying to prevent her thesis from being accepted) * history of women in medieval europe (see below) * US civil war history (attacks from state politicians) The most extreme case is the person who does history of women in medieval europe. Organized groups of students take her class and are clearly trained in precisely the places where they can write hate speech specifically focused at her but also just general hate speech against women but have privacy laws make it impossible for them to actually be associated with their writing. This is a tactic designed to get her to slip up and breach some sort of privacy protection, upon which time they immediately bring legal action. I'll let you guess whether FIRE is protecting her in the legal action. Universities are hardly right-wing institutions, true. But that doesn't mean that FIRE is a bipartisan institution. If you want a nationally recognized example, go check out what is going on at UNC Chapel Hill now.
- asabjorn 5y ago
  I am not sure how I am supposed to get your identity from you providing a few published examples. The UNC Chapel Hill case is a bad example as Nikole Hannah-Jones engaged in divisive political activism in her role instead of academic rigor and is the brains behind major indoctrination efforts such as the 1619 project. Someone like her that teach students what to think instead of how should not get tenure, and does not meet the academic rigor to teach. Calls for academic freedom has been used to subvert university resources from academic pursuits to political activism. This was never the intention behind protections of academic freedom and is a corruption of the academic pursuit.
  - UncleMeat 5y ago
    So much for free speech then. Clearly some kinds are good and some are "divisive political activism" that don't deserve any kind of protection.
  - klyrs 5y ago
    Is discussion of Critical Race Theory an exercise of free speech?
    - fallingknife 5y ago
      Teachers are employees, and freedom of speech has never been recognized in that context. For example, it would be kind of ridiculous if a science teacher was allowed to teach students flat earth theory because of freedom of speech. Outside of the classroom, which was the subject of the comment above, obviously it would be covered by the 1st amendment.
      - wolverine876 5y ago
        > Teachers are employees, and freedom of speech has never been recognized in that context. In college, it certainly has and is recognized. Tenure, in particular, is at least partly designed to protect professors' ability to research and speak, free of censorship or influence.
        asabjorn 5y ago
        > In college, it certainly has and is recognized. Tenure, in particular, is at least partly designed to protect professors' ability to research and speak, free of censorship or influence. It is true that tenure is there to protect professors engaging in the liberal project on unpopular topics. However, many do not pass the bar to receive tenure. Nikole Hannah-Jones of the 1619 project is not engaging in the liberal project tenure seek to protect. I've said elsewhere in this thread that the goal the 1619 Project is not, and never was, to improve our historical understanding. Rather, its goal was always to perpetrate a critical historiography that muddles and besmirches it (i.e. problematize). This includes undermining trust in the liberal ideas of individualism and human universality, wherein people are judged by the contents of their character and recognized for their common humanity, and forwarding identity-group thinking that is more useful for (radical) identity politics. She is therefore in direct opposition to the liberal mission of the universities, and she does not deserve to receive tenure protection to continue subverting resources intended to further the university liberal mission to what is useful for (radical) identity politics. Protecting the universities liberal environment agains activists like her is a necessary precondition for continuing the liberal project.
- javagram 5y ago
  https://www.thefire.org/fire-statement-unc-trustees-alleged-nixing-1619-project-creator-tenured-position/ https://www.thefire.org/fire-statement-unc-trustees-alleged-... FIRE issued a statement about investigating UNC chapel hill. Do you have any information that NHJ approached them to represent her in a lawsuit and was turned down? Your other examples are pretty vague but if they are secret enough that you can’t link to them, why would you expect FIRE to have learned of them? Is this inside information you have about the professor reaching out to FIRE and being turned down?
  - UncleMeat 5y ago
    I'd expect FIRE to have learned of them because the affected individuals sought legal support from a variety of institutions and organizations.
- fallingknife 5y ago
  How would FIRE defend these people from these things. Death threats are already illegal, and a police issue. The rest of what you are describing sounds like things that are protected by the first amendment rights of those people / groups who disagree with the conclusions of the researchers.
  - UncleMeat 5y ago
    You don't think people having their careers threatened for their research is the sort of thing FIRE would have in their wheelhouse if it were a conservative?

UncleMeat 5y ago

It'd reveal my identity. More broadly, these faculty members include researchers who work in: * climate science (death threats, widespread media attacks, attempts from politicians to cancel grants) * digital privacy (death threats) * history of policing (death threats, attacks from Hannity, attacks from the Hoover institute trying to prevent her thesis from being accepted) * history of women in medieval europe (see below) * US civil war history (attacks from state politicians) The most extreme case is the person who does history of women in medieval europe. Organized groups of students take her class and are clearly trained in precisely the places where they can write hate speech specifically focused at her but also just general hate speech against women but have privacy laws make it impossible for them to actually be associated with their writing. This is a tactic designed to get her to slip up and breach some sort of privacy protection, upon which time they immediately bring legal action. I'll let you guess whether FIRE is protecting her in the legal action. Universities are hardly right-wing institutions, true. But that doesn't mean that FIRE is a bipartisan institution. If you want a nationally recognized example, go check out what is going on at UNC Chapel Hill now.

asabjorn 5y ago
I am not sure how I am supposed to get your identity from you providing a few published examples. The UNC Chapel Hill case is a bad example as Nikole Hannah-Jones engaged in divisive political activism in her role instead of academic rigor and is the brains behind major indoctrination efforts such as the 1619 project. Someone like her that teach students what to think instead of how should not get tenure, and does not meet the academic rigor to teach. Calls for academic freedom has been used to subvert university resources from academic pursuits to political activism. This was never the intention behind protections of academic freedom and is a corruption of the academic pursuit.
- UncleMeat 5y ago
  So much for free speech then. Clearly some kinds are good and some are "divisive political activism" that don't deserve any kind of protection.
- klyrs 5y ago
  Is discussion of Critical Race Theory an exercise of free speech?
  - fallingknife 5y ago
    Teachers are employees, and freedom of speech has never been recognized in that context. For example, it would be kind of ridiculous if a science teacher was allowed to teach students flat earth theory because of freedom of speech. Outside of the classroom, which was the subject of the comment above, obviously it would be covered by the 1st amendment.
    - wolverine876 5y ago
      > Teachers are employees, and freedom of speech has never been recognized in that context. In college, it certainly has and is recognized. Tenure, in particular, is at least partly designed to protect professors' ability to research and speak, free of censorship or influence.
      - asabjorn 5y ago
        > In college, it certainly has and is recognized. Tenure, in particular, is at least partly designed to protect professors' ability to research and speak, free of censorship or influence. It is true that tenure is there to protect professors engaging in the liberal project on unpopular topics. However, many do not pass the bar to receive tenure. Nikole Hannah-Jones of the 1619 project is not engaging in the liberal project tenure seek to protect. I've said elsewhere in this thread that the goal the 1619 Project is not, and never was, to improve our historical understanding. Rather, its goal was always to perpetrate a critical historiography that muddles and besmirches it (i.e. problematize). This includes undermining trust in the liberal ideas of individualism and human universality, wherein people are judged by the contents of their character and recognized for their common humanity, and forwarding identity-group thinking that is more useful for (radical) identity politics. She is therefore in direct opposition to the liberal mission of the universities, and she does not deserve to receive tenure protection to continue subverting resources intended to further the university liberal mission to what is useful for (radical) identity politics. Protecting the universities liberal environment agains activists like her is a necessary precondition for continuing the liberal project.
javagram 5y ago
https://www.thefire.org/fire-statement-unc-trustees-alleged-nixing-1619-project-creator-tenured-position/ https://www.thefire.org/fire-statement-unc-trustees-alleged-... FIRE issued a statement about investigating UNC chapel hill. Do you have any information that NHJ approached them to represent her in a lawsuit and was turned down? Your other examples are pretty vague but if they are secret enough that you can’t link to them, why would you expect FIRE to have learned of them? Is this inside information you have about the professor reaching out to FIRE and being turned down?
- UncleMeat 5y ago
  I'd expect FIRE to have learned of them because the affected individuals sought legal support from a variety of institutions and organizations.
fallingknife 5y ago
How would FIRE defend these people from these things. Death threats are already illegal, and a police issue. The rest of what you are describing sounds like things that are protected by the first amendment rights of those people / groups who disagree with the conclusions of the researchers.
- UncleMeat 5y ago
  You don't think people having their careers threatened for their research is the sort of thing FIRE would have in their wheelhouse if it were a conservative?