Live data from Hacker News

Campus free speech was in trouble in 2018, and the data shows worsening

greglukianoff.substack.com

121–126 of 126 posts

Re: Campus free speech was in trouble in 2018, and the data shows worsening

#121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not being realistic? You speaking from personal experience? Because I've been to many, many, protests, and I think I have a very good idea of the consequences of being disruptive, with the literal scars to show for it. I watched proud boys march with police escort. I dealt with people shaking fetus pictures in my face the third Friday of every month for four years when I'm just trying to get to the library. I wit…

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Duncan_Lemp https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killings_of_Aaron_Danielson_... https://amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jun/14/virginia-sho... https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/14/us/steve-scalise-congress... https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/capitol-breached-protesters/... I ask for minimal perspective towards people you feel contempt. I'd say the same to someone claiming left win…

I've no idea the point you're trying to make - almost all your links are regarding individual incidents of violence, I'm talking about state violence against protesters in general. It's ironic you chose the capitol insurrection as an example - if that had been antifascists, the cops likely wouldn't have colluded to let them in, and there probably would have been far more violence, considering how they normally treat leftist protestors.

Don't you find it odd that the people with a hanged effigy of the vice president outside the capitol were able to ransack congressional halls with only four dead as a result?

Re: Campus free speech was in trouble in 2018, and the data shows worsening

#122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> without addressing the substance of her arguments The point of grifters is to overwhelm with insubstantial arguments. Do your fun game to her Twitter feed. See how long you can keep it up. Better yet: see if you can put a dent in her or her follower's belief system by totally pwning her with rigorous logic. Double standard: you picked apart my post and didn't acknowledge a thing about the tweet I quoted. Do you dis…

>racism is illogical and dependent on cognitive fallacy to be maintained. Can you explain why it's illogical and what fallacy it's maintained on? I don't think I can logically claim torturing babies is wrong without some arbitrary axioms but you must have some killer logic I don't. >Double standard: you picked apart my post and didn't acknowledge a thing about the tweet I quoted. I did though (?). She said something…

What are you, Spock? Outside of computer science logic has been used by philosophers for thousands of years to justify certain ethics. What, it doesn't count if you can't do a formal logic diagram? Absurd.

Yes, racism is illogical, because it's based on unsubstantiated ideas (e.g. some race is bad at swimming) for which there's insufficient evidence, a given prejudice doesn't provide useful information because there's race wouldn't be a stronger correlator than other factors for a given prejudice (e.g. ability to swim). It requires confirmation bias and cherry picking to maintain.

But leave that to the side, I'm happy to say "racism bad" is an axiom of human ethics, just like "slavery bad." I'm happy to simply eject the people that disagree from our society without the need to spend an ounce of energy proving them wrong or arguing with them. I fear the loss of nothing valuable in this circumstance. Is that dogmatic? Does it matter? Will you defend the racists and the slavers?

Re: Campus free speech was in trouble in 2018, and the data shows worsening

#123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Duncan_Lemp https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killings_of_Aaron_Danielson_... https://amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jun/14/virginia-sho... https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/14/us/steve-scalise-congress... https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/capitol-breached-protesters/... I ask for minimal perspective towards people you feel contempt. I'd say the same to someone claiming left win…

I've no idea the point you're trying to make - almost all your links are regarding individual incidents of violence, I'm talking about state violence against protesters in general. It's ironic you chose the capitol insurrection as an example - if that had been antifascists, the cops likely wouldn't have colluded to let them in, and there probably would have been far more violence, considering how they normally treat…

I know there's collusion between some police departments and far right protestors in the US, this is obvious. I say some because there are exceptions.

But your point was "there's no problem [protesting for the right]" and there is, there obviously is. They range from death at the hands of far left killers, persecution at work/academia, unemployment.

It's absurd to pretend the right has no stake when protesting as you implied.

>individual incidents of violence

So it's a coincidence the killers were ideologically opposed to the victims? I don't get how "individual" these deaths are when there's a clear political motivation.

Death of ideological enemies by "civilians" is how fascism in Italy began. Civilian political violence is not irrelevant.

Re: Campus free speech was in trouble in 2018, and the data shows worsening

#124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand how you suggest I am opposed to it. I am not giving anyone more or less freedom of speech rights lol.

Protesting is a form of speech. If Milo is going to be mic'd up by my university to spew his rage bait, how is my shouting from the crowd a less valid form of speech? Unless you believe the institutional bureaucratic process of putting him on that stage automatically lends him more validity, in which case I highly recommend reading some Hannah Arendt

Well you are prohibiting others free speech by protesting in that way. I do not agree that prohibiting others from speaking is a form of speech. So in that case, you are only using your voice in order to destroy others. If you were protesting in the hallway outside trying to convince people of your opinion, that is just fine but don't prohibit other people from speaking their minds.

But yes I do believe in some processes, you can host an event on the campus as well to tell everyone how he is wrong.

I won't read any book recommended by people like you, sorry.

Re: Campus free speech was in trouble in 2018, and the data shows worsening

#125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't say unions are socialist at all. In fact unions are the first thing to go out the window under socialist governments. (The relevant part of the Wiki article is highlighted) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_relations_in_China#:~:... .

You have a narrow view of socialism - it's a broad tent and in many ways neither Russia and the USSR nor China during the great leap forward are representive of what most socialists aim for. Regardless of your thoughts on the matter, 100 years ago in the USofA : Unlike the American Federation of Labor, the Industrial Workers of the World opposed the First World War. The American Protective League (APL) was a pro-war…

I like unions. I don't like socialism. Socialist countries ban unions, which I like. Unions need freedoms to operate, which need to be respected too. Unions have a lot of ideological affinity with socialist movements, usually downright indistinguishable, I think this is not good.

Re: Campus free speech was in trouble in 2018, and the data shows worsening

#126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Protesting is a form of speech. If Milo is going to be mic'd up by my university to spew his rage bait, how is my shouting from the crowd a less valid form of speech? Unless you believe the institutional bureaucratic process of putting him on that stage automatically lends him more validity, in which case I highly recommend reading some Hannah Arendt

Well you are prohibiting others free speech by protesting in that way. I do not agree that prohibiting others from speaking is a form of speech. So in that case, you are only using your voice in order to destroy others. If you were protesting in the hallway outside trying to convince people of your opinion, that is just fine but don't prohibit other people from speaking their minds. But yes I do believe in some proce…

> I won't read any book recommended by people like you, sorry.

Great, so I can basically stunlock you from reading any author by just mentioning them? In that case, I highly recommend you read The Lean Startup by Eric Ries, Zero to One by Peter Thiel, Founder's Dilemmas by Noam Wasserman....

Seriously, what kind of statement is that, you think you so fundamentally disagree with my values that you will purposefully echo-chamber yourself from anything even seemingly aligned with me? Do you have any idea who Hannah Arendt even is? She's an absurdly well respected Jewish philosopher that fled Nazi Germany by the skin of her teeth. She is frequently cited.

You just did the equivalent of "well some gross lefty recommended I read Sun Tzu's Art of War, I dunno who this Sun Tzu guy is but I don't trust him if he gets recommended by people like THAT!"

I'm honestly flabbergasted at your comment. You're basically proving that speech alone isn't enough, if people like you will put your fingers in your ears and say "la la la, I can't hear you!" Between the two of us, apparently only one is afraid of rigorously challenging their viewpoints!

Seriously, the irony could kill me. She's famous for her covering of the Eichmann trial, a nazi bureaucrat tried for crimes against humanity. She noted that he wasn't a monster, just a person whose morality was clouded by a devotion to bureaucracy and systems. If it's a process, it must be right. Hence "the banality of evil," a term she coined.

> But yes I do believe in some processes, you can host an event on the campus as well to tell everyone how he is wrong.

And his "supporters" (he has few to none) can organize a counter-protest. What's wrong with that? What inherent authority does he have? His message is all he can offer, and it's up to people to challenge it or support it. It's the 2000s, it's not like we can't possibly know what he has to say unless a college gives him a podium. Hell, he can soapbox it in the park if he wants.

> If you were protesting in the hallway outside trying to convince people of your opinion, that is just fine but don't prohibit other people from speaking their minds.

Have you ever actually seen a protest against a speaker? 99% of the time, it involves standing up, shouting your piece, and then being escorted out. Sometimes people shout things back. Oh well, what's the big deal? I find the idea of sitting quietly while someone says something stupid through a microphone, then signing up to give my own talk in 3 months so I can say my own stupid replies through the same microphone, absurd. No human society can survive with that level of bureaucracy throttling the free flow of ideas.

In my experience, the only people that fear free exchange of ideas are people whose ideas depend on deeply entrenched systems to enforce their ideology. Their ideas simply don't withstand fluid scrutiny.

Post reply on HN