5 ms·
> College students aren’t very enthusiastic about free speech. In particular, that’s true for liberal or left-wing students, who are at best inconsistent in the
by PartiallyTyped 3y ago
> College students aren’t very enthusiastic about free speech. In particular, that’s true for liberal or left-wing students, who are at best inconsistent in their support of free speech and have very little tolerance for controversial speech they disagree with.
First, citations needed, second, talk about ad-homs.
People simply don't want to see hate-speech, and they are allowed to not want to see bigotry and vitriol. People understand that "free speech" that devolves into hate-speech results in stochastic terrorism as well. If only somebody could do about those [bad] leftists!
The biggest irony of all, is that all proponents of free speech only care about their capacity to exercise judgement and have access to the megaphone. See Elon banning speech that insults/humiliates or otherwise disagrees with. See truth-social banning all speech regarding abortions/RvW, etc.
Free-speech is to protect you from the government. That doesn't mean we, the people should have to see, accept, or entertain vitriol and hate-speech. We the people are passing our judgement, and we the people don't want to see it.
If you break the social contract, you pay the consequences. If you can't behave like an adult and decide to break the social contract, you face the consequences. It's time to grow up.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- LeafItAlone 3y ago> First, citations needed This article was Nate’s examination of data which (in his analysis) resulted in this idea. The article is literally the “citation”.
- PartiallyTyped 3y agoPlease, the questions are ridiculous, the "liberal" ones are ridiculously mild, whereas the Conservative ones are borderline insane; a) trans ppl are cray-cray (refuted by science), b) country wide abortion ban and thus a ban on bodily autonomy (so much for personal-freedoms) We also know that what one expresses, and what one does are two different things. Expressing you'd be okay with someone expressing things that go against your beliefs doesn't mean you actually support them. E.g analogous to claiming you have a free-speech focused social media website, let's call it pravda.social, and at the same time you ban criticism of topic. (s/pravda/truth, s/topic/abortion). That's not sufficient to draw a conclusion imho.
- LeafItAlone 3y agoWhether or not you agree with the survey questions or response or with Nate's analysis of them, that is the conclusion that he drew from the data and he doesn't need a citation to state his conclusion. If I say "There are three people in the room. I opened the door and saw three people" you don't say I need a citation to state my conclusion that "There are three people in the room", I have already explained how I arrived that that conclusion.
- EEMac 3y ago> citations needed https://duckduckgo.com/?t=ftsa&q=college+cancels+conservative+speaker+after+student+protest&ia=web https://duckduckgo.com/?t=ftsa&q=college+cancels+conservativ...
- PartiallyTyped 3y agoThere are qualifiers that make the claim specific. Conservatives love their strawmans, maybe they need to go back to college and pick a class on argumentation.