3 ms·

I don't think they're equivalent on the west (why is it relevant?) but I do think you're softening a lot the harm of the academic example because the violence a

I don't think they're equivalent on the west (why is it relevant?) but I do think you're softening a lot the harm of the academic example because the violence against the speaker is just the tip of the iceberg. If a victim of socialist violence can't speak, can you acknowledge that phenomenon in that institution? Will grants or even studies that acknowledge that socialist state violence be taboo when recruiting students and researchers? Corrupting an institution that's (unfairly) used as the arbiter for scientific truth is not insignificant.

cauch 3y ago
Things are more complicated: some people get more fame and more founding that their work would normally require because they present themselves as cancelled. There are even "anti-leftist-dogma university" initiatives coming out, which means that right-wing academic will have an easy position available there while left-wing academics don't have any such advantage. It does not compensate, but that's one thing. Another element that I find telling is that people talk about US academic sector as if the academic sector was not extremely international. If your very good and very true research is black-listed in leftism-dogmatic US universities, if it is indeed very good and very true, this article will be supported by universities in other countries.
- hotdogscout 3y ago
  I'm not American and I wasn't thinking of the US exclusively. I think it's a problem of democratic western academia, but there's no data outside the US as far as I know. If academic institutions of rich reputation champion, for example, denial of the Cambodian genocide, is the harm undone if another institution admits it happened? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambodian_genocide_denial#:~:text=Cambodian%20genocide%20denial%20is%20the,in%20Cambodia%20were%20much%20exaggerated https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambodian_genocide_denial#:~.... >Things are more complicated: some people get more fame and more founding that their work would normally require because they present themselves as cancelled. There are even "anti-leftist-dogma university" initiatives coming out, which means that right-wing academic will have an easy position available there while left-wing academics don't have any such advantage I think the worst of the deplatformed people enjoy this fame, which is not great. I'm a lot less concerned about Milo's exclusion than I am of Xi Van Fleet's. Drawing the ~line of acceptability~ at human rights is fine but academia is drawing it at leftist interest.
  - cauch 3y ago
    > If academic institutions of rich reputation champion, for example, denial of the Cambodian genocide, is the harm undone if another institution admits it happened? That's a really good example: if another institution admits it happened, it demonstrates that institutions are not controlled by a cambodian-genocide-denial-dogma. Same here: as some left-wing events were cancelled by another university, even they are not the majority of the cancellation, it demonstrates that universities are not controlled by a left-wing-dogma. > I'm a lot less concerned about Milo's exclusion than I am of Xi Van Fleet's. And your Milo is another person Xi Van Fleet: you are basically admitting that you base your impression based on people you think were unfairly cancelled because they have an opinion that you think is sensible. I was not able to find cases where Van Fleet was cancelled in an university event (the large majority of the research results are about how she is cancelled, again, the "bad leftist" has probably done more for spreading her view than what her views would have been otherwise, as they appear to be not really original). But I'm pretty sure you can easily find a person who say that the right-wing is like the chinese communists based on their own experience, and I'm pretty sure the right-wing people will criticize this person as much as Van Fleet is, and will protest as much to their event if they have the opportunity and if this person gets as much media coverage as Van Fleet. (also about "democratic western academia problem": I don't get how this argument is a "win". It's basically "right-wing people are so stupid they cannot even find a way to publish something true themselves". If what a right-wing person is saying is true, then you will have universities that will support them, just because supporting someone who tells something that is true is just very very beneficial for the university. On top of that, as said elsewhere, it's not like the whole power spectrum is left-wing, so they will have plenty of support. Imagine the level of effort it will need for the bad university-leftist-owners to chase down every academic that is not a left-wing dishonest conspiracists (being left-wing does not mean a scientist will accept to reject the truth) in the WHOLE WESTERN WORLD so they cannot get any level of power in any one western uni? And at the same time, there are plenty of academic people who are right-wing, have done very well career-wise)
    - hotdogscout 3y ago
      I'm well aware there's nuance but it's still a problem. A country club is extremely biased towards conservatism even if there isn't an all encompassing authoritarian mind control scheme for it. Leftism is popular in Academia because of selection bias and not some huge conspiracy, I'm aware, but that is still a problem if it lets so much misbehaviour pass and keeps gaslighting critics. >being left-wing does not mean a scientist will accept to reject the truth I agree but it's been known to happen and it's been known to be brushed under the carpet. Although there has been recent cases of literal socialist conspiracies in Ivy League universities. https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/harvard-university-professor-and-two-chinese-nationals-charged-three-separate-china-related https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/harvard-university-professor-...

cauch 3y ago

Things are more complicated: some people get more fame and more founding that their work would normally require because they present themselves as cancelled. There are even "anti-leftist-dogma university" initiatives coming out, which means that right-wing academic will have an easy position available there while left-wing academics don't have any such advantage. It does not compensate, but that's one thing. Another element that I find telling is that people talk about US academic sector as if the academic sector was not extremely international. If your very good and very true research is black-listed in leftism-dogmatic US universities, if it is indeed very good and very true, this article will be supported by universities in other countries.

hotdogscout 3y ago
I'm not American and I wasn't thinking of the US exclusively. I think it's a problem of democratic western academia, but there's no data outside the US as far as I know. If academic institutions of rich reputation champion, for example, denial of the Cambodian genocide, is the harm undone if another institution admits it happened? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambodian_genocide_denial#:~:text=Cambodian%20genocide%20denial%20is%20the,in%20Cambodia%20were%20much%20exaggerated https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambodian_genocide_denial#:~.... >Things are more complicated: some people get more fame and more founding that their work would normally require because they present themselves as cancelled. There are even "anti-leftist-dogma university" initiatives coming out, which means that right-wing academic will have an easy position available there while left-wing academics don't have any such advantage I think the worst of the deplatformed people enjoy this fame, which is not great. I'm a lot less concerned about Milo's exclusion than I am of Xi Van Fleet's. Drawing the ~line of acceptability~ at human rights is fine but academia is drawing it at leftist interest.
- cauch 3y ago
  > If academic institutions of rich reputation champion, for example, denial of the Cambodian genocide, is the harm undone if another institution admits it happened? That's a really good example: if another institution admits it happened, it demonstrates that institutions are not controlled by a cambodian-genocide-denial-dogma. Same here: as some left-wing events were cancelled by another university, even they are not the majority of the cancellation, it demonstrates that universities are not controlled by a left-wing-dogma. > I'm a lot less concerned about Milo's exclusion than I am of Xi Van Fleet's. And your Milo is another person Xi Van Fleet: you are basically admitting that you base your impression based on people you think were unfairly cancelled because they have an opinion that you think is sensible. I was not able to find cases where Van Fleet was cancelled in an university event (the large majority of the research results are about how she is cancelled, again, the "bad leftist" has probably done more for spreading her view than what her views would have been otherwise, as they appear to be not really original). But I'm pretty sure you can easily find a person who say that the right-wing is like the chinese communists based on their own experience, and I'm pretty sure the right-wing people will criticize this person as much as Van Fleet is, and will protest as much to their event if they have the opportunity and if this person gets as much media coverage as Van Fleet. (also about "democratic western academia problem": I don't get how this argument is a "win". It's basically "right-wing people are so stupid they cannot even find a way to publish something true themselves". If what a right-wing person is saying is true, then you will have universities that will support them, just because supporting someone who tells something that is true is just very very beneficial for the university. On top of that, as said elsewhere, it's not like the whole power spectrum is left-wing, so they will have plenty of support. Imagine the level of effort it will need for the bad university-leftist-owners to chase down every academic that is not a left-wing dishonest conspiracists (being left-wing does not mean a scientist will accept to reject the truth) in the WHOLE WESTERN WORLD so they cannot get any level of power in any one western uni? And at the same time, there are plenty of academic people who are right-wing, have done very well career-wise)
  - hotdogscout 3y ago
    I'm well aware there's nuance but it's still a problem. A country club is extremely biased towards conservatism even if there isn't an all encompassing authoritarian mind control scheme for it. Leftism is popular in Academia because of selection bias and not some huge conspiracy, I'm aware, but that is still a problem if it lets so much misbehaviour pass and keeps gaslighting critics. >being left-wing does not mean a scientist will accept to reject the truth I agree but it's been known to happen and it's been known to be brushed under the carpet. Although there has been recent cases of literal socialist conspiracies in Ivy League universities. https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/harvard-university-professor-and-two-chinese-nationals-charged-three-separate-china-related https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/harvard-university-professor-...