A chilling study shows how hostile college students are toward free speech

[Rion]

Obviously you can find folks in both camps that oppose the extreme-PC culture they've created on campuses...

However, if far-left collegiate kids are encroaching on free speech, it's normal to expect conservative voices to be the ones to come forward and say "hang on there kid, put the breaks on...you can't dictate what other people can and can't say based on your own personal preferences"

The issue is, the conservative voices that are saying that to them, are the same conservative voices that just got done crying about how a happy holidays sign is a "war on Christmas"...and the same ones that gleefully dragged the previous president through the mud with all kinds of nasty comments because "it's my right to free speech to criticize the president", but then complain incessantly about people poking fun at Trump and say "you know, even though your side lost, you need to support our president"

That's not really what's going on though. Sure, there's social conservatives who are agreeing with the outcry, but it isn't simply partisan politics. Look at the likes of "Gamergate," "Comicgate" and the "Puppy Saga." Look at the slump Hollywood, etc. is in. There's an ever growing group of the American population that is tired of identity politics, censorship, and demonizing people who disagree with you.

 

[super animator]

That's not really what's going on though. Sure, there's social conservatives who are agreeing with the outcry, but it isn't simply partisan politics. Look at the likes of "Gamergate," "Comicgate" and the "Puppy Saga." Look at the slump Hollywood, etc. is in. There's an ever growing group of the American population that is tired of identity politics, censorship, and demonizing people who disagree with you.

You oversimplifying some things here.

 

[Rion]

You oversimplifying some things here.

Yes, but I was referring to the situation as a whole.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

There's an ever growing group of the American population that is tired of identity politics, censorship, and demonizing people who disagree with you.

I would say it's been quite the opposite.

The fact that our selections for president were Trump v. Hillary
The fact that both wings of the media have become massive echo chambers
The fact that everyone's group affiliations dictate their positions on every issue

...are all indicators that not only are people not tired of identity politics, but they're embracing it with more enthusiasm than ever before.

 

[iluvatar5150]

I would say it's been quite the opposite.

The fact that our selections for president were Trump v. Hillary
The fact that both wings of the media have become massive echo chambers
The fact that everyone's group affiliations dictate their positions on every issue

...are all indicators that not only are people not tired of identity politics, but they're embracing it with more enthusiasm than ever before.

The only time the right hates identity politics is when they're not the favored identity in a discussion. Otherwise, they've embraced it whole-heartedly for at least the last couple decades. They just can't recognize/admit it.

 

[Rion]

The only time the right hates identity politics is when they're not the favored identity in a discussion. Otherwise, they've embraced it whole-heartedly for at least the last couple decades. They just can't recognize/admit it.

With that much projection, you better open up a concession stand.

 

[szechuan]

They let Ben Shapiro Speak at Berkeley are they still against free speech too now?

 

[Rion]

They let Ben Shapiro Speak at Berkeley are they still against free speech too now?

You mean when they charged him a boat load of money, kept screwing around with the date/location, and it cost the city $600,000 to let it happen?

 

[iluvatar5150]

With that much projection, you better open up a concession stand.

I started listening to Limbaugh not long after he went national, about '92 or '93 as best as I can remember, and listened as regularly as I could until I finished college in '01, and then sporadically to him, Glenn Beck (before Beck went nuts), and some local guys for a couple years after that.

At least for the ~25 years that I've been aware of the conservative movement, the right has made frequent use of identity terms like "liberal media", "leftists", "pointy headed liberals", "east coast/coastal elites", "hollywood elites", "feminazis", "tree huggers", "gay activists", "gay lobby", and a host of others to paint liberals as some sort of "other" group, while "conservative" was typically used as a means of identifying themselves. "RINO" came along somewhere in the middle and more modern terms have gotten vulgar enough that I can't use them here.

For nearly every identity group on the left, conservatives have positioned themselves as a sort of anti group, and I would argue that being an "anti-" identity is itself an identity. Additionally, the right have turned "conservative" and "liberal" into their own identities for the purposes of defining an "other". I know plenty of liberals, but I can't think of any who come close to branding themselves with the terms "liberal" or "progressive" the way that so many on the right do with the term "conservative".

 

[Rion]

I started listening to Limbaugh not long after he went national, about '92 or '93 as best as I can remember, and listened as regularly as I could until I finished college in '01, and then sporadically to him, Glenn Beck (before Beck went nuts), and some local guys for a couple years after that.

At least for the ~25 years that I've been aware of the conservative movement, the right has made frequent use of identity terms like "liberal media", "leftists", "pointy headed liberals", "east coast/coastal elites", "hollywood elites", "feminazis", "tree huggers", "gay activists", "gay lobby", and a host of others to paint liberals as some sort of "other" group, while "conservative" was typically used as a means of identifying themselves. "RINO" came along somewhere in the middle and more modern terms have gotten vulgar enough that I can't use them here.

For nearly every identity group on the left, conservatives have positioned themselves as a sort of anti group, and I would argue that being an "anti-" identity is itself an identity. Additionally, the right have turned "conservative" and "liberal" into their own identities for the purposes of defining an "other". I know plenty of liberals, but I can't think of any who come close to branding themselves with the terms "liberal" or "progressive" the way that so many on the right do with the term "conservative".

Ah, you're trying to change the meaning or don't understand the meaning...

identity politics

 

[variant]

You mean when they charged him a boat load of money, kept screwing around with the date/location, and it cost the city $600,000 to let it happen?

Are you telling me that free speech isn't free?

 

[Cearbhall]

For example, "I should be able to say whatever I want no matter how offensive you find it, you need to grow a thicker skin" is a sentiment I agree with...but it doesn't sound very convincing coming from people who just got done crying about coffee cups saying "happy holidays", and complaining about how every little thing the government doesn't give them their own way on, is somehow a "war on <insert ideology>".

I agree. I can't think of a group that doesn't have members who demonstrate this behavior.

It seems that a certain portion of the population is this way, and therefore they wind up being represented in every group. I don't see it as a defining characteristic of any particular group, as some do.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

They let Ben Shapiro Speak at Berkeley are they still against free speech too now?

You mean when they charged him a boat load of money, kept screwing around with the date/location, and it cost the city $600,000 to let it happen?

I'm going to have to agree with @Rion on that one...they pretty much made it as difficult for him as possible...they just couldn't afford to let another Milo/Coulter scenario happen so they tried to squash him speaking with more "diplomatic" means rather than having a bunch of brats lighting trashcans on fire.

It seemed like they were hoping he'd bail, but then they could still have claimed that they took the high road.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Ah, you're trying to change the meaning or don't understand the meaning...

identity politics

I know what the meaning is. What I'm saying is that conservatives have taken the sort of social unity found in these other groups and used it to define and segregate themselves. It was a long time ago that conservative were all united merely by a shared outlook on policy. Today, "conservatism" (or lately, Trump fanboyism) has become its own cultural identity, somewhat regardless of the actual policies views held by folks within the group.

 

[Goonie]

http://archive.is/3knue

Opinion | A chilling study shows how hostile college students are toward free speech

Pretty decent until the end, at which point the author started eating paste or something.

Only one problem the survey was an online opt-in survey where students self selected themselves.
'Junk science': experts cast doubt on widely cited college free speech survey

This is not a random sampling of college students. So fairly meaningless junk science designed to appeal to the right.

 

[DaisyDay]

Only one problem the survey was an online opt-in survey where students self selected themselves.
'Junk science': experts cast doubt on widely cited college free speech survey

This is not a random sampling of college students. So fairly meaningless junk science designed to appeal to the right.

That puts a different light on things.

The 2016 Gallup survey of more than 3,000 college students, who had been selected in a carefully randomized process from a nationally representative group of colleges, had asked students the same question. It found that 78% of students said colleges should create an “open learning environment”.

 

[LoAmmi]

That's not really what's going on though. Sure, there's social conservatives who are agreeing with the outcry, but it isn't simply partisan politics. Look at the likes of "Gamergate," "Comicgate" and the "Puppy Saga." Look at the slump Hollywood, etc. is in. There's an ever growing group of the American population that is tired of identity politics, censorship, and demonizing people who disagree with you.

There's also a bunch of people who are making a bunch of money by exaggerating the impact of all this stuff too. It's like a self-feeding machine at this point where people on both sides make money by perpetuating it and other people getting caught up in the fervor.

 

[DaisyDay]

That's not really what's going on though. Sure, there's social conservatives who are agreeing with the outcry, but it isn't simply partisan politics. Look at the likes of "Gamergate," "Comicgate" and the "Puppy Saga." Look at the slump Hollywood, etc. is in. There's an ever growing group of the American population that is tired of identity politics, censorship, and demonizing people who disagree with you.

What is the "Puppy Saga"?

 

[Rion]

What is the "Puppy Saga"?

Taken from my blog:

It is unfortunate, but I cannot link directly to Sarah A. Hoyt's blog where she describes the state of fear she experienced when she dared to publish while being suspected of being conservative, but I can suggest that you look up Say Goodbye To the State of Fear with her name, and it should be the top result. This is not uncommon, and the Hugo Awards became a battleground after readers and authors got tired of it and wised up on the fact that the progressives were using it for nepotism and push works which promoted social justice ideals. Two groups arose out of this: the Sad Puppies, who simply wanted to get works that the fans thought were best and were not social justice tracts on the ballots, and the Rabid Puppies, who mostly wanted to leave a crater behind "for the lulz." This escalated over the years until it became a slate war between the three, reaching a point where the progressives voted no award rather than allow something the non-enlightened riff-raff favored.

Keep in mind that this wasn't a war between two groups who wanted their ideologies to dominate the awards. The Sad Puppies were nominating the likes of Jim Butcher, Neil Gaiman, and Neal Stephenson while the Progressives pushed forth nominees like a short story about a woman who day dreams that her boyfriend was a dinosaur so that he wasn't beaten up after getting mistaken for being gay, and a novella where a drop of water falls to the earth whenever someone lies... and whose only use is in relation to the main character coming out of the closet to his family. Truth be told, the stories nominated by the SP were generally apolitical, as were many of the authors. There were even progressive authors who didn't like the SP campaign that they nominated, because their work was considered among the best. Meanwhile, the progressives were only nominating things which were in line with identity politics.

I am not suggesting that the SP did nothing wrong, necessarily, but I am suggesting that, at the very least, it seems to be a protest by fans and some authors who were tired of being silenced and ignored. Yet, if you google "sad puppies and rabid puppies" you'll get a list of articles talking about how evil right-wing extremists were trying to take over the Hugo Awards.

 

[super animator]

Only one problem the survey was an online opt-in survey where students self selected themselves.
'Junk science': experts cast doubt on widely cited college free speech survey

This is not a random sampling of college students. So fairly meaningless junk science designed to appeal to the right.

Jeez Rion, looks like you need to fact check more harshly instead of accepting this, just because it conforms your beliefs.