5 ms·

I haven't been in University for over a decade now, but is this an actual real problem or just conservative provocateurs whining?

ecmascript 3y ago
> actual real problem or just conservative provocateurs whining Can't tell if this is a joke or not. If not, can't you see the irony in your own typing?
- woooooo 3y ago
  It's a fair question, people are always trying to work the refs. It sounds like a real problem to me but I'm not in school either.
- snapcaster 3y ago
  I'm not really a political partisan, what I'm attempting to ask is if this is a real problem affecting genuine academics and others or if it's just people like Milo (grifter) being mad they can't run their grifts on campuses anymore
  - ecmascript 3y ago
    So only certain people should have free speech? Who determines who is a grifter? You? The angry mob? Your comments is anecdotal proof of what the article tries to convey.
    - snapcaster 3y ago
      If i was paying tuition or donating to a university I would for sure not want someone like Milo (come on man, just admit he's a grifter) on the campus
      - ecmascript 3y ago
        The point of free speech is to accept that other peoples opinions can be aired and shared. If you do not like him, do not attend his talk. That doesn't mean you have to prohibit everyone else from attending it too. I am not arguing the specific case of Milo, I think he may be a grifter but I honestly don't care. If people are trying to censor him I will stand by his side as I would with yours if you were being censored or "cancelled". Since someone paying tuition perhaps feels the same way of someone you like, no one would be allowed on the campus in the long run with the logic that grifters should be cancelled.
        komali2 3y ago
        Why are you opposed to the student's right to free speech? Why are you automatically giving Milo more freedom of speech rights?
        ecmascript 3y ago
        I don't understand how you suggest I am opposed to it. I am not giving anyone more or less freedom of speech rights lol.
        komali2 3y ago
        Protesting is a form of speech. If Milo is going to be mic'd up by my university to spew his rage bait, how is my shouting from the crowd a less valid form of speech? Unless you believe the institutional bureaucratic process of putting him on that stage automatically lends him more validity, in which case I highly recommend reading some Hannah Arendt
        ecmascript 3y ago
        Well you are prohibiting others free speech by protesting in that way. I do not agree that prohibiting others from speaking is a form of speech. So in that case, you are only using your voice in order to destroy others. If you were protesting in the hallway outside trying to convince people of your opinion, that is just fine but don't prohibit other people from speaking their minds. But yes I do believe in some processes, you can host an event on the campus as well to tell everyone how he is wrong. I won't read any book recommended by people like you, sorry.
    - cauch 3y ago
      This argument is soooo ridiculous. Who determines who is a grifter? What about facts? Reality? The guy own's admission when he is boosting about how manipulative he is and when he admit fueling controversies for his own profit? That "you cannot judge anything because 'who has decided that'" argument is very weak. You are saying that Milo is not a grifter. But who determines who is not-a-grifter? You? The angry mob? "Water is wet". "Who determines that? You? The angry mob?" "This guy is bad, he kills kitten". "Who determines that? You? The angry mob?" ... It's basically "alternative facts" where YOU determines what is true or not based on what suits you.
      - ecmascript 3y ago
        It's not tho. I think he should be able to host events without getting "cancelled" even if he is a grifter. That is the whole point with having free speech to begin with. If you are not on board on that, you are not on board with free speech at all. Besides that, your counter-argument falls short because the one that is suggesting something have the burden of proof. If you say he is a grifter, the burden of proof is up to you. If I say water is wet, the burden of proof is up to me. Also even if you think he is a grifter, I may perhaps not agree and thus someones opinion either have to be valued higher OR we just let everyone speak and host events like we do with free speech. If you do not like the guy, don't attend his event. Why is that so hard?
        cauch 3y ago
        [flagged]
shrimp_emoji 3y ago
Lol, look into the huge chilling effect geneticists face in their research if you want to see a substantive effect this has. Combining your "searching for truth" program with a "purist political ideology" program is a bad idea. When you split facts down a political dichotomy, "conservative whining" is just a check engine light that you're blind to half the world.
- snapcaster 3y ago
  Can you link some? I don't follow this and not in academia so pretty out of the loop
silverquiet 3y ago
The modern conservative movement has always been uncomfortable around academia; there's no doubt about that. I have my own ideas why but I'm sure most people can imagine their own reasons. I went to a state school for what was largely job training. I think that those who go to exclusive private schools (which is a minority among the minority of Americans who have college degrees) are going for different reasons. So ideological control of them is important amongst the elite, but I can't imagine it's a subject that the average American expends much energy thinking about; I certainly try not to.
richrichie 3y ago
The so called on conservatives are now closer to liberal ideals than the so called liberals are. IOW, left is the new right. Things have changed. One side salivates just thinking about censorship and thought control and that side is not the side you think it is.

ecmascript 3y ago

> actual real problem or just conservative provocateurs whining Can't tell if this is a joke or not. If not, can't you see the irony in your own typing?

woooooo 3y ago
It's a fair question, people are always trying to work the refs. It sounds like a real problem to me but I'm not in school either.
snapcaster 3y ago
I'm not really a political partisan, what I'm attempting to ask is if this is a real problem affecting genuine academics and others or if it's just people like Milo (grifter) being mad they can't run their grifts on campuses anymore
- ecmascript 3y ago
  So only certain people should have free speech? Who determines who is a grifter? You? The angry mob? Your comments is anecdotal proof of what the article tries to convey.
  - snapcaster 3y ago
    If i was paying tuition or donating to a university I would for sure not want someone like Milo (come on man, just admit he's a grifter) on the campus
    - ecmascript 3y ago
      The point of free speech is to accept that other peoples opinions can be aired and shared. If you do not like him, do not attend his talk. That doesn't mean you have to prohibit everyone else from attending it too. I am not arguing the specific case of Milo, I think he may be a grifter but I honestly don't care. If people are trying to censor him I will stand by his side as I would with yours if you were being censored or "cancelled". Since someone paying tuition perhaps feels the same way of someone you like, no one would be allowed on the campus in the long run with the logic that grifters should be cancelled.
      - komali2 3y ago
        Why are you opposed to the student's right to free speech? Why are you automatically giving Milo more freedom of speech rights?
        ecmascript 3y ago
        I don't understand how you suggest I am opposed to it. I am not giving anyone more or less freedom of speech rights lol.
        komali2 3y ago
        Protesting is a form of speech. If Milo is going to be mic'd up by my university to spew his rage bait, how is my shouting from the crowd a less valid form of speech? Unless you believe the institutional bureaucratic process of putting him on that stage automatically lends him more validity, in which case I highly recommend reading some Hannah Arendt
        ecmascript 3y ago
        Well you are prohibiting others free speech by protesting in that way. I do not agree that prohibiting others from speaking is a form of speech. So in that case, you are only using your voice in order to destroy others. If you were protesting in the hallway outside trying to convince people of your opinion, that is just fine but don't prohibit other people from speaking their minds. But yes I do believe in some processes, you can host an event on the campus as well to tell everyone how he is wrong. I won't read any book recommended by people like you, sorry.
  - cauch 3y ago
    This argument is soooo ridiculous. Who determines who is a grifter? What about facts? Reality? The guy own's admission when he is boosting about how manipulative he is and when he admit fueling controversies for his own profit? That "you cannot judge anything because 'who has decided that'" argument is very weak. You are saying that Milo is not a grifter. But who determines who is not-a-grifter? You? The angry mob? "Water is wet". "Who determines that? You? The angry mob?" "This guy is bad, he kills kitten". "Who determines that? You? The angry mob?" ... It's basically "alternative facts" where YOU determines what is true or not based on what suits you.
    - ecmascript 3y ago
      It's not tho. I think he should be able to host events without getting "cancelled" even if he is a grifter. That is the whole point with having free speech to begin with. If you are not on board on that, you are not on board with free speech at all. Besides that, your counter-argument falls short because the one that is suggesting something have the burden of proof. If you say he is a grifter, the burden of proof is up to you. If I say water is wet, the burden of proof is up to me. Also even if you think he is a grifter, I may perhaps not agree and thus someones opinion either have to be valued higher OR we just let everyone speak and host events like we do with free speech. If you do not like the guy, don't attend his event. Why is that so hard?
      - cauch 3y ago
        [flagged]

shrimp_emoji 3y ago

Lol, look into the huge chilling effect geneticists face in their research if you want to see a substantive effect this has. Combining your "searching for truth" program with a "purist political ideology" program is a bad idea. When you split facts down a political dichotomy, "conservative whining" is just a check engine light that you're blind to half the world.

snapcaster 3y ago
Can you link some? I don't follow this and not in academia so pretty out of the loop

silverquiet 3y ago

The modern conservative movement has always been uncomfortable around academia; there's no doubt about that. I have my own ideas why but I'm sure most people can imagine their own reasons. I went to a state school for what was largely job training. I think that those who go to exclusive private schools (which is a minority among the minority of Americans who have college degrees) are going for different reasons. So ideological control of them is important amongst the elite, but I can't imagine it's a subject that the average American expends much energy thinking about; I certainly try not to.

richrichie 3y ago

The so called on conservatives are now closer to liberal ideals than the so called liberals are. IOW, left is the new right. Things have changed. One side salivates just thinking about censorship and thought control and that side is not the side you think it is.