5 ms·

Time for them to be ex-cornell students. This should not be tolerated.

by windex 5y ago

thesausageking 5y ago
Students aren't allowed to boo and leave in protest for a speaker they disagree with? No, thanks. I find their position detestable, but I support their right to express it.
- octonion 5y ago
  There aren't two sides to genocide.
  - cphoover 5y ago
    This. I wonder how people would have viewed this if this were a talk on the holocaust and students were laughing/jeering.
    - thesausageking 5y ago
      It wouldn't change my view. The only way to have free speech is to also protect someone's right to say the most vile, repugnant things.
  - dirtyid 5y ago
    There are multiple sides to attributing whether XJ is a genocide vs crimes against humanity vs COIN/deradicalization. Deradicalization has plurality of global support, followed by crimes against humanity, absolute minority position is genocide. Are foreign students expected to fully align with US foreign policy when they study in US?
- avianlyric 5y ago
  Leaving in protest, fine. But jeering, booing and taunting, that’s a step too far. That no longer protesting a speaker as part of a free debate, but instead attacking them as an individual in the hopes of cowing them into submission. There’s no space for that kind of behaviour in a university debate. The individual in question wasn’t a celebrity or politician knowingly stepping into the lions den, but just a student asking an honest and fair question.
  - batrachos 5y ago
    > There’s no space for that kind of behaviour in a university debate. Setting the present question aside, I think this is a very time-bound point of view. There used to be riots in Harvard Yard over theological questions. Now we're so cowed that a little booing and a walkout is national news. I think we could use to be a little ruder to each other.
    - mytailorisrich 5y ago
      Maybe I'm starting to get old, but indeed to me booing sounds like part and parcel of a university debate on a divisive topic... People clap, people boo, sometimes worse!
    - afiori 5y ago
      I prefer my academic research not be conducted in terms of unorganized trials by combat.
    - avianlyric 5y ago
      The big difference is that if you’re attending a riot in Harvard Yard, then you clearly know what you’re getting yourself into, and you’re making an informed decision to participate and accept the consequences. However if you’re someone attending a spoken debate, and you’re asking a reasonable question backed by lived experience (as opposed to a deliberately provocative question based on the assumed experiences of others), then you shouldn’t be subjected to direct personal attacks. Attacking someone because their lived experiences run counter to your preferred world view is just intellectual cowardice. You’re neither trying to learn from the speaker, or provide a valuable counter-experience. You’re running from knowledge that might force you re-assess your world view.
  - YATA0 5y ago
    >But jeering, booing and taunting, that’s a step too far. That no longer protesting a speaker as part of a free debate, but instead attacking them as an individual in the hopes of cowing them into submission. That would remove a significant portion of campus leftists.
- wyre 5y ago
  What? If I’m seeing a speaker that I disagree with I have complete and total freedom to leave.
- technobabbler 5y ago
  In much of academic debate, free speech is just some ivory tower topic discussed between two sides without much personal risk or involvement, and whoever wins or loses, whatever, afterward you go and grab lunch and forget about it. But in this case there is such a vast power differential between the two (the persecuted and the persecutor). The Chinese kids are literally taunting the victim of a genocide their country is perpetrating. That's not a free speech/hate speech thing, that's just straight up bullying... while that girl's family is still in danger of life and liberty. "Hahahaha your family is in danger, boooo you suck, hahaha." That is unacceptable in any circumstance, akin to Holocaust denialism in a synagogue, except that in this case the Uyghur holocaust is still ongoing. One side has no power and is at risk of death while the other side is completely protected and just being assholes. It's not a freedom of expression issue, it's a basic human decency thing. If you don't want to hear it, just leave, don't taunt the people your government is enslaving and murdering.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- HstryrsrBttn 5y ago
usednet 5y ago
Disruptive protest has been a thing on college campuses since colleges existed. Imagine if one took the commenters in this thread seriously and universities had just expelled all Vietnam protestors, segregation protestors, anti-Iraq/Afghanistan war protestors, sexual assault activists, etc. These groups have all took part in equally if not much more disruptive protests, which have been well documented.

Time for them to be ex-cornell students. This should not be tolerated.

by windex 5y ago

Time for them to be ex-cornell students. This should not be tolerated.

Students aren't allowed to boo and leave in protest for a speaker they disagree with? No, thanks. I find their position detestable, but I support their right to express it.

octonion 5y ago
There aren't two sides to genocide.
- cphoover 5y ago
  This. I wonder how people would have viewed this if this were a talk on the holocaust and students were laughing/jeering.
  - thesausageking 5y ago
    It wouldn't change my view. The only way to have free speech is to also protect someone's right to say the most vile, repugnant things.
- dirtyid 5y ago
  There are multiple sides to attributing whether XJ is a genocide vs crimes against humanity vs COIN/deradicalization. Deradicalization has plurality of global support, followed by crimes against humanity, absolute minority position is genocide. Are foreign students expected to fully align with US foreign policy when they study in US?
avianlyric 5y ago
Leaving in protest, fine. But jeering, booing and taunting, that’s a step too far. That no longer protesting a speaker as part of a free debate, but instead attacking them as an individual in the hopes of cowing them into submission. There’s no space for that kind of behaviour in a university debate. The individual in question wasn’t a celebrity or politician knowingly stepping into the lions den, but just a student asking an honest and fair question.
- batrachos 5y ago
  > There’s no space for that kind of behaviour in a university debate. Setting the present question aside, I think this is a very time-bound point of view. There used to be riots in Harvard Yard over theological questions. Now we're so cowed that a little booing and a walkout is national news. I think we could use to be a little ruder to each other.
  - mytailorisrich 5y ago
    Maybe I'm starting to get old, but indeed to me booing sounds like part and parcel of a university debate on a divisive topic... People clap, people boo, sometimes worse!
  - afiori 5y ago
    I prefer my academic research not be conducted in terms of unorganized trials by combat.
  - avianlyric 5y ago
    The big difference is that if you’re attending a riot in Harvard Yard, then you clearly know what you’re getting yourself into, and you’re making an informed decision to participate and accept the consequences. However if you’re someone attending a spoken debate, and you’re asking a reasonable question backed by lived experience (as opposed to a deliberately provocative question based on the assumed experiences of others), then you shouldn’t be subjected to direct personal attacks. Attacking someone because their lived experiences run counter to your preferred world view is just intellectual cowardice. You’re neither trying to learn from the speaker, or provide a valuable counter-experience. You’re running from knowledge that might force you re-assess your world view.
- YATA0 5y ago
  >But jeering, booing and taunting, that’s a step too far. That no longer protesting a speaker as part of a free debate, but instead attacking them as an individual in the hopes of cowing them into submission. That would remove a significant portion of campus leftists.
wyre 5y ago
What? If I’m seeing a speaker that I disagree with I have complete and total freedom to leave.
technobabbler 5y ago
In much of academic debate, free speech is just some ivory tower topic discussed between two sides without much personal risk or involvement, and whoever wins or loses, whatever, afterward you go and grab lunch and forget about it. But in this case there is such a vast power differential between the two (the persecuted and the persecutor). The Chinese kids are literally taunting the victim of a genocide their country is perpetrating. That's not a free speech/hate speech thing, that's just straight up bullying... while that girl's family is still in danger of life and liberty. "Hahahaha your family is in danger, boooo you suck, hahaha." That is unacceptable in any circumstance, akin to Holocaust denialism in a synagogue, except that in this case the Uyghur holocaust is still ongoing. One side has no power and is at risk of death while the other side is completely protected and just being assholes. It's not a freedom of expression issue, it's a basic human decency thing. If you don't want to hear it, just leave, don't taunt the people your government is enslaving and murdering.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
HstryrsrBttn 5y ago

usednet 5y ago

Disruptive protest has been a thing on college campuses since colleges existed. Imagine if one took the commenters in this thread seriously and universities had just expelled all Vietnam protestors, segregation protestors, anti-Iraq/Afghanistan war protestors, sexual assault activists, etc. These groups have all took part in equally if not much more disruptive protests, which have been well documented.