C'mon Defend Socialism!

[nice marmot]

whoops sent too soon - will continue

if there is a crisis of free-speech on campus, are we talking about students / speakers / or faculty speech being curtailed?

who is the fascist "they" doing the curtailing?

The statistics - from over 4000 universities and colleges, don't really bear up. You have isolated anecdotes - there was the book burning by conservative students at Georgia Southern when a latinx writer mentioned white privilege. I am sure you could dredge up countervailing incidents, but overall statistics simply don't bear out a crisis: the crisis, indeed, is coming from governmental overreach in places like Florida and, yes, by Donald Trump, who is setting a very dangerous precedent by tying funding to "free speech" policies per this past March.

1) regarding students, I point you to this analysis: https://www.niskanencenter.org/there-is-no-campus-free-speech-crisis-a-close-look-at-the-evidence/

The point of this, which addresses countercriticism, is this, "The gist of our collective argument was that young people and university students are generally supportive of free speech, that university enrollment is associated with an increase in tolerance for offensive speech, and that a small number of anecdotes have been permitted to set the terms of public debate."

2) regarding speakers: there was the famous issue with Yianniopolous's "Dangerous ****** Tour" if you'd like to line up behind him. Most of the literature regarding stifling of speakers points to issues with this tour. Richard Spencer met with catcalls, again, not sure you want to ride his coattails. BUT, there's the inconvenient fact that in most cases they are indeed allowed on campus despite their repugnant views (legally in most cases they cannot be barred) and more complications still because he and others such as Ann Coulter - another lightningrod - actually seem to thrive on this antagonism.

Anyway, there are plenty on the left who are also on the receiving end of "censoriousness" and you can read about all the various issues here: https://freespeechproject.georgetown.edu/free-speech-tracker/

and analysis of same:

3) regarding professors getting fired - here's a review of that which, again, notes that a relatively small number of firings over speech do not skew to firing over conservative speech. https://www.vox.com/policy-and-poli...rrectness-free-speech-liberal-data-georgetown This while acknowledging that there is a greater preponderance of professors who identify liberal generally in academia.

Finally, I know you won't value this or the vox link, but here's this: https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2019/10/15/real-threat-free-speech-campus-isnt-coming-left/

And there is also the fact that the Harper's letter that drew so much controversy literally is an example of the academy self policing.
Sorry, you can cherrypick incidents, but you're going to have to point to a coordinated crisis for me to buy that it's some fascist plot.
nm

 

[nice marmot]

The world of academia is constantly pushing their socialist mantra on students. You find examples daily of conservative students being treated unfairly as a result of their beliefs. As far as leftist groups self censoring, that is laughable, they never think they have gone far enough to force their views upon others.
Your theory has more holes than the Russia collusion story.

See below. Also - I don't have a theory. It's whosyodawgy's theory that is under scrutiny here.

 

[MCinATL]

From Portland friend in response to: "How is Portland right now? As bad as all that?"

"Ha! No. Not a bit. Any violence that's happening is confined to about 3 square blocks downtown. And not that there aren't some bad apples (mostly white people) who are LARPing as Blolshevik revolutionaries, the vast majority of the violence is being started by the cops. I've been to maybe a dozen protests all over the city and they've been 100% peaceful."

LARP = Live Action Role Playing

Just one point of view. I asked him wtf happened in the Northeast Precinct.

"I had to look up what happened. Again, seems like LARPers. I don't condone it."

i do have a question for you on this subject: Since you appear to believe that this is playing out (or should be) within the control of the elected authorities in Oregon, whose responsibility will it be to pay for the restoration of the damages once it all ends? Do you believe that burden should be solely on the people of Oregon, since their elected officials want total control over resolving the situation, or should they be allowed to ask for the assistance of all American taxpayers to restore?

Perhaps as an adjunct - what responsibility does the American taxpayer have in restoring Minneapolis? Where would you stand on restoration, since it appears that you believe responsibility for mitigation is entirely a local issue.

 

[nice marmot]

I just pulled resources debunking this. I enjoyed my time in school and in grad school and generally met many people across the ideological spectrum. I believe that our university system is still the envy of the world, in part because it rewards free speech. I think it is those who buy into alarmist conspiracies are the victims here, I think we should support our universities for striking the balance they do.

 

[Deadlyputter]

I agree. It is a waste of time arguing when one party fails to recognize the imminent danger from ... a President who is both racist and increasingly lawless. I could just as easily point by point this and note that your argument here is all but absurd. But good luck to you. It seems you are pretty deeply in thrall to FOX or television news. That can’t be healthy and it does seem to have affected your vigilance. Enjoy.

I follow these posts and typically they're the same. Conservatives tend to come on here and make valid points that could be discussed point by point which could result in good dialogue and interaction between knowledgeable people on both sides of an issue. Instead, the left tends to resort to (baseless) name calling and thinks that settles the issue and then nothing new is revealed. There are exceptions of course, but sadly they're few and far between.

 

[nice marmot]

i do have a question for you on this subject: Since you appear to believe that this is playing out (or should be) within the control of the elected authorities in Oregon, whose responsibility will it be to pay for the restoration of the damages once it all ends? Do you believe that burden should be solely on the people of Oregon, since their elected officials want total control over resolving the situation, or should they be allowed to ask for the assistance of all American taxpayers to restore?

I doubt the damages will hit the American taxpayer, but I have not read on the subject. You tell me. I guess that in cases where businesses are insured (I do believe that the designation "riot" can affect that) the insurance will pay. A good powerwasher will do some of the work. I would be surprised if there weren't good community efforts in these places. The statues are likely gone and will be relocated if they can or replaced. But, as I say, I don't know. I would say that there are some things more important than property - which is to live in a just society.

 

[nice marmot]

I follow these posts and typically they're the same. Conservatives tend to come on here and make valid points that could be discussed point by point which could result in good dialogue and interaction between knowledgeable people on both sides of an issue. Instead, the left tends to resort to (baseless) name calling and thinks that settles the issue and then nothing new is revealed. There are exceptions of course, but sadly they're few and far between.

I am making a good faith effort at no small personal cost. time is money for me. But the fact is that there are a lot of alarmist tropes that don't come with anything but anecdotal support and those aren't particularly helpful to dialogue either.

 

[MCinATL]

I doubt the damages will hit the American taxpayer, but I have not read on the subject. You tell me. I guess that in cases where businesses are insured (I do believe that the designation "riot" can affect that) the insurance will pay. A good powerwasher will do some of the work. I would be surprised if there weren't good community efforts in these places. The statues are likely gone and will be relocated if they can or replaced. But, as I say, I don't know. I would say that there are some things more important than property - which is to live in a just society.

well, we do know, as fact, that the Governor or Minnesota asked for Federal Aid for restoration in Minneapolis. If such aid were granted - it hits the American Taxpayer. President Trump denied it. Do you believe this is right or wrong?

also, so i am clear in my understanding, and not reading thru my own bias - are you inferring that because insurance may pay, that criminal damage to private property is somehow less bad?

 

[nice marmot]

also, so i am clear in my understanding, and not reading thru my own bias - are you inferring that because insurance may pay, that criminal damage to private property is somehow less bad?

No, I think the property damage sucks. I saw lots of footage of protesters trying to stop the bad actors. I am sure you did too. Civil unrest is complicated.

 

[MCinATL]

No, I think the property damage sucks. I saw lots of footage of protesters trying to stop the bad actors. I am sure you did too. Civil unrest is complicated.

and you are equivocating, and trying to shift the question - please don't. you do that frequently. the question to you: it can actually be distilled to a yes or no - if the local government demands control of mitigating the situation, does the Federal government, and therefore, the American Taxpayer has an obligation to assist in restoration?

 

[nice marmot]

and you are equivocating, and trying to shift the question - please don't. you do that frequently. the question to you: it can actually be distilled to a yes or no - if the local government demands control of mitigating the situation, does the Federal government, and therefore, the American Taxpayer has an obligation to assist in restoration?

You seem to be asking me a legal question the answer to which I do not know. The federal government makes its decisions largely independent of the American Taxpayer, does it not?

 

[MCinATL]

You seem to be asking me a legal question the answer to which I do not know. The federal government makes its decisions largely independent of the American Taxpayer, does it not?

no, i am asking YOUR opinion, which you seem greatly hesitant to give. You are an intelligent man, that is clear, so i believe you understand the question. In your opinion: if the local government demands control of mitigating the situation, does the Federal government, and therefore, the American Taxpayer has an obligation to assist in restoration?

and you know, as well as i, that your second statement is an attempt to distract. You know, as do i, the Federal Government has no revenue-generating engine that is backed up by anything other than the American Taxpayer. Given that, whether the decisions are independent, the funding is not.

please, answer the direct question that has been asked of you. i have been polite and civil, i would like the courtesy of a direct response.

 

[nice marmot]

i would like the courtesy of a direct response.

No, I do not believe that the federal government has an obligation to unilaterally support all municipalities requests for funds, nor do I personally think it should have to. I do think the Feds should choose to act in cases of forces majeur like hurricanes. States, many of them, are under balanced budget bills. I don't know if Minnesota is one of those. This limits their ability to address budget crises created by external factors.

 

[MCinATL]

No, I do not believe that the federal government has an obligation to unilaterally support all municipalities requests for funds, nor do I personally think it should have to. I do think the Feds should choose to act in cases of forces majeur like hurricanes. States, many of them, are under balanced budget bills. I don't know if Minnesota is one of those. This limits their ability to address budget crises created by external factors.

thank you, that is all i wanted to know...

 

[nice marmot]

thank you, that is all i wanted to know...

I somehow missed in one message that it was requested and denied and your direct question there. Apologies.

 

[Whosyodawgy]

if there is a crisis of free-speech on campus, are we talking about students / speakers / or faculty speech being curtailed?

who is the fascist "they" doing the curtailing?

The statistics - from over 4000 universities and colleges, don't really bear up. You have isolated anecdotes - there was the book burning by conservative students at Georgia Southern when a latinx writer mentioned white privilege. I am sure you could dredge up countervailing incidents, but overall statistics simply don't bear out a crisis: the crisis, indeed, is coming from governmental overreach in places like Florida and, yes, by Donald Trump, who is setting a very dangerous precedent by tying funding to "free speech" policies per this past March.

1) regarding students, I point you to this analysis: https://www.niskanencenter.org/there-is-no-campus-free-speech-crisis-a-close-look-at-the-evidence/

The point of this, which addresses countercriticism, is this, "The gist of our collective argument was that young people and university students are generally supportive of free speech, that university enrollment is associated with an increase in tolerance for offensive speech, and that a small number of anecdotes have been permitted to set the terms of public debate."

2) regarding speakers: there was the famous issue with Yianniopolous's ...

Here is the "issue" you tried to blame on the person scheduled to speak ... the dangerous gay man.



But that's ok because his speech was "dangerous".

 

[nice marmot]

Here is the "issue" you tried to blame on the person scheduled to speak ... the dangerous gay man.

Wait - aren't you supposed to have your radar out for anti-semites? I don't think the ADL is much of a fan of Milo's, but the point is not to debate Yiannopolous' promotion of pedophilia or not or his anti-semitism or not...

The point is that you are raising the alarm over some sort of fascist anti-speech trend on campuses and, yet, here he was going to be allowed on campus.

Indeed, proof counter to your argument, he was explicitly not banned by the administration, who beefed up security for all the good it did, despite he does seem just a rabble rouser. Sure protests caused him to cancel it, but it wasn't the administration or some sort of governmental fiat. Reports suggest it might not even have been students doing the crimes. But in any event, protest is protected speech too, right?

 

[Zonadog]

Wait - aren't you supposed to have your radar out for anti-semites? I don't think the ADL is much of a fan of Milo's, but the point is not to debate Yiannopolous' promotion of pedophilia or not or his anti-semitism or not...

The point is that you are raising the alarm over some sort of fascist anti-speech trend on campuses and, yet, here he was going to be allowed on campus.

Indeed, proof counter to your argument, he was explicitly not banned by the administration, despite he does seem just a rabble rouser. Sure protests caused him to cancel it, but it wasn't the administration or some sort of governmental fiat. Reports suggest it might not even have been students doing the crimes. But in any event, protest is protected speech too, right?

free speech ends where someone else's property, or nose, begins

 

[nice marmot]

free speech ends where someone else's property, or nose, begins

No doubt. "Peaceful Protest," per the student/faculty. Not the outside agitators (or any students or faculty) that incited violence and damage.

 

[Zonadog]

No doubt. "Peaceful Protest," per the student/faculty. Not the outside agitators (or any students or faculty) that incited violence and damage.

I'm also remembering when Berkeley spent $600K on security so that Ben Shapiro could speak on campus without a riot. They also provided free counseling for faculty and students who "felt threatened," not by Antifa terrorists or the mob outside the building chanting "Speech is Violence," but the little Jewish lawyer. And this during their "Year of Free Speech."

 

[nice marmot]

I'm also remembering when Berkeley spent $600K on security so that Ben Shapiro could speak on campus without a riot. They also provided free counseling for faculty and students who "felt threatened," not by Antifa terrorists or the mob outside the building chanting "Speech is Violence," but the little Jewish lawyer. And this during their "Year of Free Speech."

Again, this would seem to dispute the notion that there's a crisis of free speech on campuses. I, too, find the whole triggering thing weak, but I grew up in the south in the seventies and I am not the kids of today. I think we'd probably be a better nation if more of us had access to adequate counseling. Mental health is a thing.

 

[Whosyodawgy]

Wait - aren't you supposed to have your radar out for anti-semites? I don't think the ADL is much of a fan of Milo's, but the point is not to debate Yiannopolous' promotion of pedophilia or not or his anti-semitism or not...

The point is that you are raising the alarm over some sort of fascist anti-speech trend on campuses and, yet, here he was going to be allowed on campus.

Indeed, proof counter to your argument, he was explicitly not banned by the administration, who beefed up security for all the good it did, despite he does seem just a rabble rouser. Sure protests caused him to cancel it, but it wasn't the administration or some sort of governmental fiat. Reports suggest it might not even have been students doing the crimes. But in any event, protest is protected speech too, right?

I do have a sort of embedded radar for anti-semitism. It is like the blood in my veins. I was born with it ... and your backhanded jew insult just made it activate.

 

[nice marmot]

I do have a sort of embedded radar for anti-semitism. It is like the blood in my veins. I was born with it ... and your backhanded jew insult just made it activate.

I was in no way making an insult. You said you had Jewish heritage. Yaniopolous has been flagged as anti-semitic. I was joking that you shouldn't be using him as an example of someone who should be speaking to kids - but, as established, we both believe he has the right to do so and should not be prevented by college admins.

 

[Whosyodawgy]

You leftists, marxists, leftists sympathising anarchists are by far the greatest threat to my people since Hitler. The Muslim hatemongers got nothing on you.

 

[Zonadog]

Again, this would seem to dispute the notion that there's a crisis of free speech on campuses. I, too, find the whole triggering thing weak, but I grew up in the south in the seventies and I am not the kids of today. I think we'd probably be a better nation if more of us had access to adequate counseling. Mental health is a thing.

That's very close to something that Shapiro said. He felt better if he helped some people find the counseling they needed.

Mental health is a thing and was a thing back in the late 70's and early 80's when I was at UGA, but surprisingly few took advantage of the resources available to them.

 

[Whosyodawgy]

I was in no way making an insult. You said you had Jewish heritage. Yaniopolous has been flagged as anti-semitic. I was joking that you shouldn't be using him as an example of someone who should be speaking to kids - but, as established, we both believe he has the right to do so and should not be prevented by college admins.

I don't believe you pal.

 

[nice marmot]

I don't believe you pal.

I don't particularly care.

 

[Whosyodawgy]

I don't particularly care.

You mean you don't care that your mean spirited words caused me distress? Don't you know that words physically harm people? Hell, now I need a safe space and some money I didn't work for. Somebody ought to have to pay off my student loans too. God knows, my degree in Gender Studies didn't land me a job not even with my minor in Psychological Quadriplegia.

 

[nice marmot]

You mean you don't care that your mean spirited words caused me distress?

If my words had been mean-spirited, I'd feel guilty. If I thought they genuinely caused you distress, I'd feel bad. But, as you display, it's a message board, and you were expressing faux outrage. We were talking about Yianopolous' provocations, which I, like you probably do, find deplorable - even if I uphold his right to express those attitudes.

 

[JohnnyBeeDawg]

Wait - aren't you supposed to have your radar out for anti-semites? I don't think the ADL is much of a fan of Milo's, but the point is not to debate Yiannopolous' promotion of pedophilia or not or his anti-semitism or not...

The point is that you are raising the alarm over some sort of fascist anti-speech trend on campuses and, yet, here he was going to be allowed on campus.

Indeed, proof counter to your argument, he was explicitly not banned by the administration, who beefed up security for all the good it did, despite he does seem just a rabble rouser. Sure protests caused him to cancel it, but it wasn't the administration or some sort of governmental fiat. Reports suggest it might not even have been students doing the crimes. But in any event, protest is protected speech too, right?

You mean Milo the "anti-semite" who said this to Jewish Journal?: "Regarding Israel, Yiannopoulos calls himself a “paid-up Zionist” who believes Israel is a bastion of civilization in a region of Islamic tyrants, saying he’d be the first to advocate for a Jewish “super-state” in the Middle East."
“I’m perfectly happy with Israeli special forces and American intelligence and all the rest of it going in and assassinating every leader of Hamas tomorrow,” he said. “I would sign that as my first executive order as president"
As a Jew married to a black man, Yiannopoulos says he is amused by being called a homophobe, anti-Semite, and racist.

He wasn't banned from any college for being an "anti-semite" or a "racist". Those are lies used as an excuse to ban him because he is an articulate conservative, politically.

 

[nice marmot]

He wasn't banned from any college for being an "anti-semite" or a "racist". Those are lies used as an excuse to ban him because he is an articulate conservative, politically.

I am not a Milo expert. Here is what the ADL says: "Yiannopoulos is a misogynistic, racist, xenophobic, transphobic troll who is extremely good at getting people to pay attention to him" and "He identifies as a Catholic but often promotes his Jewish background to ward off accusations of racism or anti-Semitism)."

https://www.adl.org/resources/backgrounders/milo-yiannopoulos-five-things-to-know

 

[1966septemberdawg]

I am not a Milo expert. Here is what the ADL says: "Yiannopoulos is a misogynistic, racist, xenophobic, transphobic troll who is extremely good at getting people to pay attention to him" and "He identifies as a Catholic but often promotes his Jewish background to ward off accusations of racism or anti-Semitism)."

https://www.adl.org/resources/backgrounders/milo-yiannopoulos-five-things-to-know

The trappings of the leftist and their tactics to discredit their antagonist.

 

[nice marmot]

You mean you don't care that your mean spirited words caused me distress? Don't you know that words physically harm people? Hell, now I need a safe space and some money I didn't work for. Somebody ought to have to pay off my student loans too. God knows, my degree in Gender Studies didn't land me a job not even with my minor in Psychological Quadriplegia.

So, couple more of your earlier points which seem overly alarmist to me:

"The left is attacking religion." How? To what significant effect? Are we not still able to freely assemble (pending Covid) as followers of whatever religion we please? One could argue that religion plays a larger role in American politics than it ever has, despite that, yes, fewer of its citizens identify with any particular religion and church attendance is declining. I don't know that this can be attributed to an organized Marxist attack, though I am open to your notes, or unless cellphones and televisions are Marxist agitators. For the record, I was raised Episcopalian. I make and fulfill an annual monetary pledge to my church. I do not go very often. I care about its family. I am always happy that I have when I do go. I also do believe in the separation of church and state which, if you can identify an extreme leftist attack on religion qua religion, certainly I can identify an extreme rightest attack on the establishment clause.

"The left is attacking the nuclear family tradition in this country." I don't read where it is unlawful or where anyone has badly chastised cis parents who have cis children. I am cis. Married. I hope to have children, but that's up to her for the most part. Beyond that, I honestly dgaf what people do in their bedrooms as long as it's not to children or animals, so long as it is consensual, and not abusive (did I miss anything?). As far as I know, indeed, married couples who file jointly still get tax deductions. I believe they get deductions for dependents, etc. Perhaps you object to gay marriage, which you are certainly free to do, but I don't see how that can be construed as a Marxist attack on you and your family. It's what other people do, not something you are forced yourself to do or be hanged.

To sum up, to the extent that either of these notions are endangered, it is not due to some undercurrent of Marxist machinations.
To the extent that any of my thoughts reassure you that your children and grandchildren and their children will be able to be married in a church of their choice in America and have it acknowledged as fact by the United States of America and rewarded by its tax code, I am glad.
enjoy your evening.

 

[1966septemberdawg]

So, couple more of your earlier points which seem overly alarmist to me:

"The left is attacking religion." How? To what significant effect? Are we not still able to freely assemble (pending Covid) as followers of whatever religion we please? One could argue that religion plays a larger role in American politics than it ever has, despite that, yes, fewer of its citizens identify with any particular religion and church attendance is declining. I don't know that this can be attributed to an organized Marxist attack, though I am open to your notes, or unless cellphones and televisions are Marxist agitators. For the record, I was raised Episcopalian. I make and fulfill an annual monetary pledge to my church. I do not go very often. I care about its family. I am always happy that I have when I do go. I also do believe in the separation of church and state which, if you can identify an extreme leftist attack on religion qua religion, certainly I can identify an extreme rightest attack on the establishment clause.

"The left is attacking the nuclear family tradition in this country." I don't read where it is unlawful or where anyone has badly chastised cis parents who have cis children. I am cis. Married. I hope to have children, but that's up to her for the most part. Beyond that, I honestly dgaf what people do in their bedrooms as long as it's not to children or animals, so long as it is consensual, and not abusive (did I miss anything?). As far as I know, indeed, married couples who file jointly still get tax deductions. I believe they get deductions for dependents, etc. Perhaps you object to gay marriage, which you are certainly free to do, but I don't see how that can be construed as a Marxist attack on you and your family. It's what other people do, not something you are forced yourself to do or be hanged.

To sum up, to the extent that either of these notions are endangered, it is not due to some undercurrent of Marxist machinations.
To the extent that any of my thoughts reassure you that your children and grandchildren and their children will be able to be married in a church of their choice in America and have it acknowledged as fact by the United States of America and rewarded by its tax code, I am glad.
enjoy your evening.

Precisely, we can attend protest and frequent liquor stores, abortion clinics, but not attend the church of our choosing( especially a Christian based religion). Churches over the weekend were stormed and a statue of Christ was toppled from its pedestal and beheaded.
Churches have been forced to embrace the homosexual lifestyle and welcome it into the church, even though it is an abomination to our God. Christianity is under attack worldwide and the United States is no exception.

 

[Whosyodawgy]

So, couple more of your earlier points which seem overly alarmist to me:

"The left is attacking religion." How? To what significant effect? Are we not still able to freely assemble (pending Covid) as followers of whatever religion we please? One could argue that religion plays a larger role in American politics than it ever has, despite that, yes, fewer of its citizens identify with any particular religion and church attendance is declining. I don't know that this can be attributed to an organized Marxist attack, though I am open to your notes, or unless cellphones and televisions are Marxist agitators. For the record, I was raised Episcopalian. I make and fulfill an annual monetary pledge to my church. I do not go very often. I care about its family. I am always happy that I have when I do go. I also do believe in the separation of church and state which, if you can identify an extreme leftist attack on religion qua religion, certainly I can identify an extreme rightest attack on the establishment clause.

"The left is attacking the nuclear family tradition in this country." I don't read where it is unlawful or where anyone has badly chastised cis parents who have cis children. I am cis. Married. I hope to have children, but that's up to her for the most part. Beyond that, I honestly dgaf what people do in their bedrooms as long as it's not to children or animals, so long as it is consensual, and not abusive (did I miss anything?). As far as I know, indeed, married couples who file jointly still get tax deductions. I believe they get deductions for dependents, etc. Perhaps you object to gay marriage, which you are certainly free to do, but I don't see how that can be construed as a Marxist attack on you and your family. It's what other people do, not something you are forced yourself to do or be hanged.

To sum up, to the extent that either of these notions are endangered, it is not due to some undercurrent of Marxist machinations.
To the extent that any of my thoughts reassure you that your children and grandchildren and their children will be able to be married in a church of their choice in America and have it acknowledged as fact by the United States of America and rewarded by its tax code, I am glad.
enjoy your evening.

The organized marxist groups like BLM are not the only ones attacking the traditional family although a co-founder of that group has stated that institution as a target. I saw that interview. But, ever since Lyndon Johnson instituted the welfare state in America with his "great society" socialist agenda, the rate of two parent households among welfare recipients fell drastically. Various studies have determined that black families are now less than 30% two parent. This clearly socialist program has been an unmitigated disaster. It does not have to be the rioter in the street who blunders into marxist/socialist dung. We have done a fine job of smearing shit on ourselves without morons in the street.