41–50 of 119 posts
Just a reminder that a .org does not mean "trustworthy". https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Foundation_for_Individ... In this case, the discussion and the tenor of the conversation is almost certainly cherry picked to serve a particular agenda. On its face, the actions by Stanford in this article seem...not good. But I also suspect that this is making a mountain out of a molehill for political gain.
Just a reminder that a .org does not mean "trustworthy". https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Foundation_for_Individ... In this case, the discussion and the tenor of the conversation is almost certainly cherry picked to serve a particular agenda. On its face, the actions by Stanford in this article seem...not good. But I also suspect that this is making a mountain out of a molehill for political gain.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The dizzying pace with which so many of our institutions—from the ACLU to basically all our our elite universities—have not only abandoned but energetically oppose their former principles, over just the past five years, is horrifying.
Can you give a concrete example?
[0]: The ACLU Has Lost Its Way: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/05/aclu-johnn...
[1]: Once a Bastion of Free Speech, the A.C.L.U. Faces an Identity Crisis: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/06/us/aclu-free-speech.html
[2]: Requiem for the American Civil Liberties Union: https://www.newsweek.com/requiem-american-civil-liberties-un...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The dizzying pace with which so many of our institutions—from the ACLU to basically all our our elite universities—have not only abandoned but energetically oppose their former principles, over just the past five years, is horrifying.
> from the ACLU The ACLU has a track record of defending the rights of the unfavorable, even irredeemable. Are there examples that lump them in with this nonsense?
[0]: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/11/aclu-devos...
[1]: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/05/aclu-johnn...
[2]: https://newrepublic.com/article/163073/first-amendment-fire
Just a reminder that a .org does not mean "trustworthy". https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Foundation_for_Individ... In this case, the discussion and the tenor of the conversation is almost certainly cherry picked to serve a particular agenda. On its face, the actions by Stanford in this article seem...not good. But I also suspect that this is making a mountain out of a molehill for political gain.
This is absolutely a molehill mountain propped up to generate outrage, which you can see manifest in these comments.
> asking them to “acknowledge” what they’ve done and “change” their ways through restorative justice-type exercises undoubtedly chills student speech. This precedes speech. This is the right to read . Stallman's essay [1] needs an update. But no books were burned so we're still the good guys, don't worry. [1] https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
And without seeing the image in question, and the context of why it was shared, it's kind of hard to say what's going on.
> This article hasn't framed the incident accurately at all. the incident was two theta girls posted a Snapchat story of them reading Mein Kampf as part of their costumes at a pregame and laughing, clearly in a joking way, not at all in a historical way. The joke was in poor taste which is why it got such a negative response (as it should). Obviously people can read Mein Kampf, but that's not what's contested here.
I imagine this story is going to get stupider.
Just a reminder that a .org does not mean "trustworthy". https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Foundation_for_Individ... In this case, the discussion and the tenor of the conversation is almost certainly cherry picked to serve a particular agenda. On its face, the actions by Stanford in this article seem...not good. But I also suspect that this is making a mountain out of a molehill for political gain.
How is keeping track of what people read a "molehill"? Do we now presume libraries will not keep your reading habits and history private?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you give a concrete example?
here[0] are[1] some[2] examples. [0]: The ACLU Has Lost Its Way: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/05/aclu-johnn... [1]: Once a Bastion of Free Speech, the A.C.L.U. Faces an Identity Crisis: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/06/us/aclu-free-speech.html [2]: Requiem for the American Civil Liberties Union: https://www.newsweek.com/requiem-american-civil-liberties-un...
Tldr: under the new policy, they consider impact of the speech to marginalized communities before deciding to defend. Presumably this would exclude Skokie IL nazis, in contrast with their past record.
Credit to them for transparency by just publishing it after it was leaked.