"Universities must uphold free speech, disallow no-platforming and safe spaces"

[Machismo]

Let me get this straight, you think I should be able to wander into a 9th grade classroom and rant about anything I please, because that classroom is public property?

- - - Updated - - -



What? I was the one inviting the people that were being denied. There are not infinite resources to hold events at colleges. They cost money. The school has a responsibility to only hold events that have educational value and to choose the most important among those.

Let's get this very straight, to ensure consistency, I think all classrooms should be privately-run/funded. That means, if you paid for it, you should be able to speak there.

- - - Updated - - -

Tax payers in this case are just paying the fees for a private institution, which are paid back by private citizens. A few facilities are paid for publicly but not many. But realistically universities in the UK should have the right to deny any speakers they wish even though they receive tax payer money. The public sector is only providing loans for the use of private institutions.

So, it's taxpayer-funded, right?

What if the universities suddenly started denying all liberal speakers, and only allowed the alt-right to have a voice... would you still support it?

[Karrotlord]

Numerous people I invited had their invitations rescinded for all kinds of reasons. That's how it works. These are not open platforms. They are a platform for education.

Out of curiosity, could you list some of those reasons?

[Machismo]

If they are invited to speak, let the people doing the inviting foot the bill. Problem solved.

[Vathoren]

You seem to assume I don't know what I'm arguing against?

No, a strawman is where you make up a position to argue against, usually because it's not a position reflected in reality.

Except the people you're talking about are just pointing out that people are divided along those lines. What you're doing is like saying someone saying "black people are discriminated against" is racist. Acknowledging the social construction of race is hardly the same as viewing another race as inferior. Acknowledging privilege isn't racism either, it's just accepting we don't live in a perfect world where race doesn't exist.

No, they aren't. They are actively encouraging racial division by framing political issues like that. The issues in question are far more nuanced and require a more intricate, objective response, rather than being used as an open wound to inject intersectionalist dogma into, which only separates because it sees people as parts of collective groups, in this case racial, rather than as individuals. Textbook racism. Race isn't a social construct, sorry. Attitudes and how it is handled are however. Racial privilege theory is racist as fuck. It makes assumptions about individuals based on skin colour. If it was still the 60's it'd have a point, but racial legislation in the U.S is gone. Are there people who abuse the legal system to target ethnic groups? Absolutely, but to then extricate that to all 'white' people is fucking racist.

You do remember that Trump was going to build a wall to keep Mexicans out and create a registry of Muslims? Sounds like the fundamentals of creating an ethno-state. Obvious politics are a big factor here.

Trump was going to build a wall in a brazen attempt to extract money from the taxpayer for himself and his buddies, rather than just siphoning it to Panama or the Cayman Islands, as is the usual way. It was framed as keeping out drug dealers and racists, but sure, it did have racist subtext. That is nothing compared to Spencer's positions. It's one of the biggest flaws I find with the far left, y'all have this habit of screeching 'ALT-RIGHT' at everything you don't like, and understand little about it. Know thy enemy. Secondarily, Muslim is not a race, its a person belonging to a religion and an ideology. To frame 'Muslim' as a race is pretty damned racist, as Islam comprises of all kinds of different people. Given the sheer amount of violence, sexual or otherwise, that Europe has experienced from unfettered migration, and the fact we now have in Britain (and this is from the Home Office) at least several hundred, if not thousands of ISIS combatants back in the U.K, un-monitored, that might not necessarily be a bad idea. And hell, if you think the NSA isn't already up on this shit, I've got news for you.

How many times do we have to challenge fascism as an ideology before we give up? Fighting these things is a drain on emotional and physical resources, resources better spent else where.

Boo fucking hoo. You fight it until it becomes universally recognized as laughably dumb. Like if someone seriously suggested re-instating feudalism. What's more, you stop castigating people based on their race, education or income, as that makes them easy pickings for the proponents of this shit. The biggest issue as I see it is that middle America is becoming increasingly 3rd world (looking at you Kentucky) due to the economic chicanery of the past 40 years, leaving people who got suckered by Reaganite nonsense impoverished, embittered, under-educated and willing listeners for the next brand of snake oil.

No I'm quite happy for people to critique social justice, just so long as it doesn't come from a position of "PC gone mad" or people playing devils advocate.

People are attempting to do that and being shut down for it. That's why the legislation is necessary.

University campuses have always been a hotbed for progressive ideas, you're not going to stop that. I dunno maybe you should put more effort into understanding the why.

Perhaps you should put more effort into recognizing what 'Progressivism' has become. It has turned into a silencing, oppressive, dogma-riddled shitshow which does not accommodate dissent or new ideas, it is actively regressive. That is what this legislation is trying to do, to let people with new or non-mainstream ideas be heard.

[Deleted]

The irony... Xarim about free speech and open debates. "Screw your fake science, natural science is only true science!!111" And one example of his open mind is so fresh, it still smells -> https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...1#post49329972

[NineSpine]

Let's get this very straight, to ensure consistency, I think all classrooms should be privately-run/funded. That means, if you paid for it, you should be able to speak there.

- - - Updated - - -



So, it's taxpayer-funded, right?

What if the universities suddenly started denying all liberal speakers, and only allowed the alt-right to have a voice... would you still support it?

Stop avoiding genuine practical questions by appealing to a libertarian fantasy world. YES OR NO: Should I be able to walk into a public school and hijack a classroom to rant about whatever I want?

[Elegiac]

The irony... Xarim about free speech and open debates. "Screw your fake science, natural science is only true science!!111"

STEM is a highly useful area of study provided you're willing to accept the cost of becoming a massively pretentious asshole.

[yinyatto]

People should be able to spout what ever the heck they want anywhere they want aslong as they are not physically violent or follow you the the ends of the earth harassing you about it.

[NineSpine]

Out of curiosity, could you list some of those reasons?

Security would be too expensive, the speaker would not be providing educational value, the speaker was invited to speak about a specific topic that was not of enough educational value, the speaker wanted too much money, there was not an adequate venue available, there were enough speakers that year on similar topics, etc.. Often, no reason was given.

[Machismo]

Stop avoiding genuine practical questions by appealing to a libertarian fantasy world. YES OR NO: Should I be able to walk into a private school and hijack a classroom to rant about whatever I want?

I literally just answered it for you. Just because you don't like the answer, is not my problem.

The university (publicly-funded) has spaces that are available for invited guests to speak. If that's the case, then discriminating who is allowed to use those facilities based on political beliefs should not be allowed.

[NineSpine]

I literally just answered it for you. Just because you don't like the answer, is not my problem.

The university (publicly-funded) has spaces that are available for invited guests to speak. If that's the case, then discriminating who is allowed to use those facilities based on political beliefs should not be allowed.

Who is being discriminated against based on political beliefs?

[Machismo]

People should be able to spout what ever the heck they want anywhere they want aslong as they are not physically violent or follow you the the ends of the earth harassing you about it.

I disagree that it should be allowed on private property, that should be up to the property owner. On public property, let them say whatever they want.

- - - Updated - - -

Who is being discriminated against based on political beliefs?

Well, when alt-right speakers were being refused... them. yes, white nationalists should still be free to speak. Yes, assholes like Milo and Richard Spencer should not be denied the chance to speak based on their rhetoric.

If you don't like it, don't go. Or, if you don't like it, go, and scream at him the entire time.

[Deleted]

All i've learned from this thread so far is Germaine Greer is apparently a Nazi according to MMO Champion.

[Elegiac]

All i've learned from this thread so far is Germaine Greer is apparently a Nazi according to MMO Champion.

Nah, it's no longer fashionable to use the term feminazi ever since neo-nazis became politically useful to conservatives.

[Kaeth]

Alright, but who should be responsible for the costs of security? Who is liable for damage or injury caused by rioters?

[NineSpine]

I disagree that it should be allowed on private property, that should be up to the property owner. On public property, let them say whatever they want.

- - - Updated - - -



Well, when alt-right speakers were being refused... them. yes, white nationalists should still be free to speak. Yes, assholes like Milo and Richard Spencer should not be denied the chance to speak based on their rhetoric.

If you don't like it, don't go. Or, if you don't like it, go, and scream at him the entire time.

Milo and Richard Spencer have zero educational value to bring to a school, and Milo has used these platforms to sexually harass students, so if those are your best examples you aren't really making a serious case here.

[Karrotlord]

Security would be too expensive, the speaker would not be providing educational value, the speaker was invited to speak about a specific topic that was not of enough educational value, the speaker wanted too much money, there was not an adequate venue available, there were enough speakers that year on similar topics, etc.. Often, no reason was given.

See, those specific ones are reasonable. But what about political disagreements? Is it ok to revoke invitations just because the person isn't part of your specific ideology? Keep in mind schools aren't hive minds.

Well, when alt-right speakers were being refused... them. yes, white nationalists should still be free to speak. Yes, assholes like Milo and Richard Spencer should not be denied the chance to speak based on their rhetoric.

If you don't like it, don't go. Or, if you don't like it, go, and scream at him the entire time.

Not just them, the story also states feminists and LGBT speakers were targeted.

[Machismo]

Milo and Richard Spencer have zero educational value to bring to a school, and Milo has used these platforms to sexually harass students, so if those are your best examples you aren't really making a serious case here.

You asked for two examples, and I offered them to you. They were invited by students, and were denied. Once again, you asked, I answered. Whether or not you liked my answer, is not my problem.

What if a school suddenly said that all liberal speakers no longer had educational value, and they chose assholes like Milo and Richard Spencer? I'm sure you would be fine with that... because you are consistent.

[NED funded]

If conservatives want representation in universities, maybe they should start going there more??

[Ragu4]

It seems like the majority of the hardcore leftists and communists on this site have anime avatars. Coincidence?