5 ms·

"protesters overtook the campus square, setting off pink and blue flares, while Stock cancelled her courses and followed police advice to stay off campus and se

"protesters overtook the campus square, setting off pink and blue flares, while Stock cancelled her courses and followed police advice to stay off campus and secure her home. I asked a protester whether the demo was designed to be intimidating. “We’re standing still,” they said. “Her presence to us is intimidating.” Emphasis mine. Is there a word to describe this? This frame of mind is deeply disturbing to me and it seems very insidious. I believe people need a term in order to understand the behavior/mindset that is being displayed here. And, to be able to inform others about it.

jawarner 5y ago
I don’t know the word for it, but virtually every conflict in history was predicated on the defense of something greater.
- kfprt 5y ago
  For self actualization people need something to strive for, some conflict. This is universal.
kfprt 5y ago
I believe that traditionally would be called a violent mob.
- BitwiseFool 5y ago
  That would fit in describing the action, but I'm trying to get at the mindset of these people. The kind of self-righteous, belligerent, insolent, and 'we are completely innocent and have no culpability whatsoever because you made us do this' attitude I'm seeing. I can jot down synonyms for hours but I still don't feel like this truly captures and categorizes what we are seeing here. Maybe I'm asking for too much, but I feel like this can be described with a single word instead of merely trying to describe it at length.
  - pfortuny 5y ago
    Witch-hunt.
  - kfprt 5y ago
    Religious authoritarians. Puritans. Theological adherence is a spiral. They have an absolute doctrine. This is what happens when you shift your moral philosophy to doctrinal adherence. Introspection is not needed when you are a perfect adherent to the one true faith. It should also be noted that religion is older than language and has a basis in biology. Just because they do not fit the modern legal categorization of religion does not mean that culturally it is not the same.
    - AlanYx 5y ago
      I don't really follow the academic freedom debate that closely, but I did notice that in the video that was circulating yesterday regarding a protest at Netflix over this class of issue, one of the protesters was saying "Repent, motherf*ker! Repent!" The "repent" language does seem to have a strong religious authoritarian quality.
      - iammisc 5y ago
        My pet theory is that puritanism is an inherited trait (not sure if genetic or cultural). america has a lot of it due to its history. The descendants of the puritans have given up all sense of religion, which actually, for them, was a net benefit, since having an external, well-organized religion actually would pull them back from their religious zealotry (by discouraging pride for example). Now, completely unmoored from their actually somewhat stabilizing traditions, these children -- already predisposed to puritanism, zealotry, etc -- have taken up new belief structures, except now there's nothing to bring them back to reality.
        kfprt 5y ago
        While no doubt there is a genetic component it would be less precise and more likely just account for a general authoritarian personality. I think this shift is too sudden to be attributable to genetics. The work of Robert Putnam on the decline of social trust in the west is more likely to be the cause.
pfortuny 5y ago
Witch-hunt.
relaxandcrash 5y ago
[dead]
systemvoltage 5y ago
"This is not activism". Here is President Obama speaking about this so called wokeness in Academia: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qaHLd8de6nM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qaHLd8de6nM
jawarner 5y ago
Is there something particularly insidious about this protest? It stands to reason that any protest would find conflict with the person whose actions are being protested. In the political sphere, there's enough police protection that the people involved can still get to work, and this wasn't provided by the campus police. It strikes me that these protesters aren't that different than any others, but the security on campus is lacking so that they've had access to, for instance, deface the professor's office door.
- AnimalMuppet 5y ago
  There's nothing insidious about the protest itself. There is something wrong with the mindset of the protesters. "I'm not being violent for having a protest; you're being violent for existing in my vicinity." That's... abnormal. Also ridiculous.
  - jawarner 5y ago
    To be clear, the quote implied the protestors weren’t being violent at all, right — at least in their view. Are we on the same page about that? Edit: I guess I’m not understanding your point. To me the protester’s narrative is “This is a nonviolent protest of a faculty’s exclusionary viewpoint,” which doesn’t seem that abnormal to me. What do you think I’m not seeing?
    - AnimalMuppet 5y ago
      Well... setting off flares isn't the same as punching or shooting people. It's not directly violent. But it is kind of threatening, because they can point those flares at you, and it may hit you, and that's not going to feel very good (at best). So there's kind of a threat of violence, but not actual violence. And, yes, I think that in their own mind the protesters were either completely innocent of violence, or else completely justified in the implicit threat of violence because the mere presence of the opponent was so threatening. It's kind of like a guy with a gun on his hip, complaining that a gun control advocate is threatening him by wanting to take away his gun.
hdjjhhvvhga 5y ago
I don't think there is a right word, but I recognize this behavior from history books. During the French Revolution the participants were similarly convinced they are doing the right thing, and they reinforced each other's views. The crowd had a feeling of a common cause and their combined strength. They believed that by beheading Marie Antoinette they are doing everybody a favor. Similarly during the Russian Revolution, the masses believed they are fighting for a great cause, some even died for it. But the revolutions are usually eating its children, and similarly now the revolutionary feminists of yesterday are being eaten by even more progressive trans activists. As Ricky Gervais said, the same will happen to the latter one day. [0] [0] https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/ricky-gervais-woke-generation-future-b1941726.html https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/ric...
- kfprt 5y ago
  "A l'exemple de Saturne, la révolution dévore ses enfants" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Mallet_du_Pan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Mallet_du_Pan
yanderekko 5y ago
Crybullying comes to mind. It lacks the connotations of puritanical self-righteousness underlying these sorts of protests but it is a term that has been popularized in response to this sort of behavior.
AnimalMuppet 5y ago
The mindset seems to be that the existence of ideas that disagree with my perspective is violence toward me. The most succinct term I can come up with for this is "five year old". For an actual description, it almost has to have "narcissism" in it, doesn't it? "X narcissism"? Can anyone come up with the right value for "X"?

jawarner 5y ago

I don’t know the word for it, but virtually every conflict in history was predicated on the defense of something greater.

kfprt 5y ago
For self actualization people need something to strive for, some conflict. This is universal.

kfprt 5y ago

I believe that traditionally would be called a violent mob.

BitwiseFool 5y ago
That would fit in describing the action, but I'm trying to get at the mindset of these people. The kind of self-righteous, belligerent, insolent, and 'we are completely innocent and have no culpability whatsoever because you made us do this' attitude I'm seeing. I can jot down synonyms for hours but I still don't feel like this truly captures and categorizes what we are seeing here. Maybe I'm asking for too much, but I feel like this can be described with a single word instead of merely trying to describe it at length.
- pfortuny 5y ago
  Witch-hunt.
- kfprt 5y ago
  Religious authoritarians. Puritans. Theological adherence is a spiral. They have an absolute doctrine. This is what happens when you shift your moral philosophy to doctrinal adherence. Introspection is not needed when you are a perfect adherent to the one true faith. It should also be noted that religion is older than language and has a basis in biology. Just because they do not fit the modern legal categorization of religion does not mean that culturally it is not the same.
  - AlanYx 5y ago
    I don't really follow the academic freedom debate that closely, but I did notice that in the video that was circulating yesterday regarding a protest at Netflix over this class of issue, one of the protesters was saying "Repent, motherf*ker! Repent!" The "repent" language does seem to have a strong religious authoritarian quality.
    - iammisc 5y ago
      My pet theory is that puritanism is an inherited trait (not sure if genetic or cultural). america has a lot of it due to its history. The descendants of the puritans have given up all sense of religion, which actually, for them, was a net benefit, since having an external, well-organized religion actually would pull them back from their religious zealotry (by discouraging pride for example). Now, completely unmoored from their actually somewhat stabilizing traditions, these children -- already predisposed to puritanism, zealotry, etc -- have taken up new belief structures, except now there's nothing to bring them back to reality.
      - kfprt 5y ago
        While no doubt there is a genetic component it would be less precise and more likely just account for a general authoritarian personality. I think this shift is too sudden to be attributable to genetics. The work of Robert Putnam on the decline of social trust in the west is more likely to be the cause.

pfortuny 5y ago

Witch-hunt.

relaxandcrash 5y ago

[dead]

systemvoltage 5y ago

"This is not activism". Here is President Obama speaking about this so called wokeness in Academia: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qaHLd8de6nM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qaHLd8de6nM

jawarner 5y ago

Is there something particularly insidious about this protest? It stands to reason that any protest would find conflict with the person whose actions are being protested. In the political sphere, there's enough police protection that the people involved can still get to work, and this wasn't provided by the campus police. It strikes me that these protesters aren't that different than any others, but the security on campus is lacking so that they've had access to, for instance, deface the professor's office door.

AnimalMuppet 5y ago
There's nothing insidious about the protest itself. There is something wrong with the mindset of the protesters. "I'm not being violent for having a protest; you're being violent for existing in my vicinity." That's... abnormal. Also ridiculous.
- jawarner 5y ago
  To be clear, the quote implied the protestors weren’t being violent at all, right — at least in their view. Are we on the same page about that? Edit: I guess I’m not understanding your point. To me the protester’s narrative is “This is a nonviolent protest of a faculty’s exclusionary viewpoint,” which doesn’t seem that abnormal to me. What do you think I’m not seeing?
  - AnimalMuppet 5y ago
    Well... setting off flares isn't the same as punching or shooting people. It's not directly violent. But it is kind of threatening, because they can point those flares at you, and it may hit you, and that's not going to feel very good (at best). So there's kind of a threat of violence, but not actual violence. And, yes, I think that in their own mind the protesters were either completely innocent of violence, or else completely justified in the implicit threat of violence because the mere presence of the opponent was so threatening. It's kind of like a guy with a gun on his hip, complaining that a gun control advocate is threatening him by wanting to take away his gun.

hdjjhhvvhga 5y ago

I don't think there is a right word, but I recognize this behavior from history books. During the French Revolution the participants were similarly convinced they are doing the right thing, and they reinforced each other's views. The crowd had a feeling of a common cause and their combined strength. They believed that by beheading Marie Antoinette they are doing everybody a favor. Similarly during the Russian Revolution, the masses believed they are fighting for a great cause, some even died for it. But the revolutions are usually eating its children, and similarly now the revolutionary feminists of yesterday are being eaten by even more progressive trans activists. As Ricky Gervais said, the same will happen to the latter one day. [0] [0] https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/ricky-gervais-woke-generation-future-b1941726.html https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/ric...

kfprt 5y ago
"A l'exemple de Saturne, la révolution dévore ses enfants" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Mallet_du_Pan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Mallet_du_Pan

yanderekko 5y ago

Crybullying comes to mind. It lacks the connotations of puritanical self-righteousness underlying these sorts of protests but it is a term that has been popularized in response to this sort of behavior.

AnimalMuppet 5y ago

The mindset seems to be that the existence of ideas that disagree with my perspective is violence toward me. The most succinct term I can come up with for this is "five year old". For an actual description, it almost has to have "narcissism" in it, doesn't it? "X narcissism"? Can anyone come up with the right value for "X"?