• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cont: Cancel culture IRL Part 2

d4m10n said:
Foundation for Individual Rights and ExpressionWP has been on the side of free speech this entire time, regardless of whether the would-be cancelers were coming from left, right, or center.

Now that the cancel mobs are being stoked by people in power on the right, FIRE are publishing articles like this one:
www.thefire.org

Why everything Pam Bondi said about ‘hate speech’ is wrong

The nation’s top law enforcement officer doesn’t understand there is no hate-speech exception to the First Amendment — and that’s scary.
www.thefire.org www.thefire.org
Click to expand...
FIRE has picked up where ACLU dropped the ball.
 
jt512 said:
Advising isn't teaching.
Click to expand...
That is correct, but if you take the trouble to list out the reasons why we protect academic freedom for instructors, you will find that most of them apply to advisers as well. Some of them, arguably more so.
 
d4m10n said:
That is correct, but if you take the trouble to list out the reasons why we protect academic freedom for instructors, you will find that most of them apply to advisers as well. Some of them, arguably more so.
Click to expand...
Since that's your claim, why don't you do that exercise yourself and post the results.
 
d4m10n said:
I've never written peer-reviewed papers about education and tend to defer to expertise.

That said, how about these seven reasons?
Click to expand...
You haven't done the exercise you yourself recommended: to explain how those reasons apply to an advisor. But that said, there is a good deal of B.S. in that blog post. You'd be better served by working from this FAIR article, which was mentioned up-thread, or this one.
 
Last edited:
jt512 said:
You haven't done the exercise you yourself recommended: to explain how those reasons apply to an advisor.
Click to expand...
No point in doing that if you reject the post's framing, so far as I can tell.
jt512 said:
You'd be better served by working from this FAIR article
Click to expand...
That article rejects the premise that you "don't have to look at any case law to understand why university administrators don't have academic freedom," though, citing case law and judicial reasoning throughout in order to explain the bounds of the concept. It does not, however, outline the reasons why academic freedom is protected in the first place, beyond a single Earl Warren quote.

Out of curiosity, though, do you think the Demers case should have turned out differently if he was admin instead of faculty?
 
Last edited:
d4m10n said:
No point in doing that if you reject the post's framing, so far as I can tell.
Click to expand...
In other words, you know that if you were to attempt the exercise, you'd fail.
d4m10n said:
That article rejects the premise that you "don't have to look at any case law to understand why university administrators don't have academic freedom," though, citing case law and judicial reasoning throughout in order to explain the bounds of the concept. It does not, however, outline the reasons why academic freedom is protected in the first place, beyond a single Earl Warren quote.

Out of curiosity, though, do you think the Demers case should have turned out differently if he was admin instead of faculty?
Click to expand...
I'm done with this idiotic discussion. Your belief that university administrators have academic freedom is off the wall. It shows you fundamentally misunderstand the concept. Not only do administrators not have academic freedom, an important purpose of academic freedom is to protect faculty from administrators.

BTW, just to make sure I wasn't losing my mind, last night I asked one of the leaders of the Academic Freedom Alliance if deans are protected by academic freedom. Their response verbatim, "No, deans serve at the pleasure of the president."
 
Last edited:
d4m10n said:
Foundation for Individual Rights and ExpressionWP has been on the side of free speech this entire time, regardless of whether the would-be cancelers were coming from left, right, or center.
Click to expand...
That's not true. FIRE have had a distinct rightist bias
 
catsmate said:
That's not true. FIRE have had a distinct rightist bias
Click to expand...
I think you're incorrect. Look at the most recent cases that they're involved in:
www.thefire.org

Cases

FIRE’s team of legal and advocacy experts have decades of experience protecting free speech both on and off college campuses. Learn more about FIRE’s civil liberties cases.
www.thefire.org www.thefire.org

You've got some bias. You seem to have not noticed all the cases where liberals were trying to censor or silence conservatives - or perhaps you agree that conservatives should be silenced and their right to free speech should be rescinded? I would speculate that you only think FIRE has a rightist bias because you *disagree* with FIRE protecting the free speech rights of people you dislike.
 
Trausti said:
So is the ACLU.
Click to expand...
Really? What about the multiple times the ACLU represented NAZIs?
Or when they represented Americans for Prosperity and Thomas More Society in 2021?
Or another time they filed Amicus briefs supporting Americans for Prosperity alongside the CATO Institute?
Or another when the ACLU filed a brief in the Supreme Court supporting the free speech rights of the conservative Christian group, Camp Constitution which was denied permission to fly a Christian flag at Boston's City Hall?
Or another when The ACLU won an appeal on behalf of a conservative student magazine that was denied funding after publishing a satirical story?

There are many more historical precedents where the ACLU has supported conservative organizations because their Constitutional rights were infringe upon.
 
acbytesla said:
Really? What about the multiple times the ACLU represented NAZIs?
Or when they represented Americans for Prosperity and Thomas More Society in 2021?
Or another time they filed Amicus briefs supporting Americans for Prosperity alongside the CATO Institute?
Or another when the ACLU filed a brief in the Supreme Court supporting the free speech rights of the conservative Christian group, Camp Constitution which was denied permission to fly a Christian flag at Boston's City Hall?
Or another when The ACLU won an appeal on behalf of a conservative student magazine that was denied funding after publishing a satirical story?

There are many more historical precedents where the ACLU has supported conservative organizations because their Constitutional rights were infringe upon.
Click to expand...
"Historical" is the operative word there. Could you please indicate the year for each of those. Today's ACLU is little if anything to do with civil liberties.
 
Last edited:
jt512 said:
Utter nonsense.
Click to expand...
Denial is not just a north African river....

But then I doubt you care about reality, right-wing money, the Bradley Foundation, the Koch brothers and the SPN, trying to control the debate.
 
catsmate said:
Denial is not just a north African river....

But then I doubt you care about reality, right-wing money, the Bradley Foundation, the Koch brothers and the SPN, trying to control the debate.
Click to expand...
Note to self: Stop clicking "Show Ignorant Ignored Content."
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom