Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A university president makes a case against cowardice

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

591–600 of 934 posts

Re: A university president makes a case against cowardice

#591

Post by cess11 »

robertlagrant wrote: post #343
vkou wrote: post #329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One ban consists of the exercise of their right to... Not associate with you. The other sends you to a Salvadoran gulag. (The silence from all the 'free speech' folks on this point is deafening.) It's odd that one ban operates within the constraints of freedom (the freedom to associate requires the exercise of the freedom to not associate), while the other does not. It's almost like there's a categorical distinction.…

> One ban consists of the exercise of their right to... Not associate with you. Many people have been fired / expelled / and many more silenced by those examples. If you can't tell the truth about your side (from how you're writing I assume you think in sides) then there's no point saying it. > The other sends you to a Salvadoran gulag. (The silence from all the 'free speech' folks on this point is deafening.) I have…

There's been a lot in usian news about people having been deported because of things like tattoo of the logo of some spanish or other soccer club.

Here's one case where the deportation seems to be based mainly on having worn sports branded merch and a hoodie, and some supposed anonymous snitch, which the state has agreed was an error:

https://www.newsweek.com/kilmar-armando-abrego-garcia-deport...

Re: A university president makes a case against cowardice

#592

Post by megous »

thyristan wrote: post #390
adhamsalama wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing in that article implies supporting terrorism. They support Palestine. People conflating supporting Palestine with supporting terrorism should be ashamed of themselves, as Israel is the biggest terror state in the world.

Well, when it comes to conflating, I'll take your calling Israel a terror state as a standard: The democratically elected government of Gaza-Palestine is the Hamas, which is a terrorist organisation. Thus by your conflation regarding Israel to be a terror state, the Gaza strip part of Palestine is as well. Its population chose a known terrorist organisation, everything is run by a terrorist organisation, they did ter…

A few issues:

- "The democratically elected government of Gaza-Palestine is the Hamas" Hamas is not a democratic government, period. Elections you're talking about were almost 20 years ago. It's like calling Trumpistan 20 years from now a democracy, if Trump today declares he'll live forever, and that there will be no more elections, and enough MAGA Americans help him persevering.

- Israel's struggle is the Zionist dream of creating a Jewish state by any means. Means have been pretty violent and treacherous, from international terrorism, assassinations of diplomats, to mass killings and violent displacement of 100s of thousands of indigenous people, unilateral declaration of statehood over someone else's land, etc. Indigenous people have been revolting against this since way before Hamas even existed. It's quite something to bothside this, or even invert this, and call indigenous people terrorists, while violent immigrant invaders and land thieves are somehow legitimate state.

- Martyr != terrorist, it's anyone killed in some manner in relation to the above political context. If a child is shot in the head by Israel's soldiers, it will be called a martyr. Executed ICRC workers were called martyrs, etc.

Re: A university president makes a case against cowardice

#593

Post by cess11 »

rayiner wrote: post #497
g8oz wrote: post #460

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The government may be within its legal rights. As an expression of values however it's hard not to see the expulsion of these students as petty politicalized retaliation. The sort of thing you would see in an electoral autocracy as opposed to a liberal democracy.

That only Americans have the right to participate in our political system is an expression of values. And it’s entirely compatible with democracy. The citizen versus non-citizen distinction is fundamental to democracy.

No, it is not.

Re: A university president makes a case against cowardice

#594

Post by noworriesnate »

Bluescreenbuddy wrote: post #550
robertlagrant wrote: post #486

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is called "victim blaming".

If a bigot acts like a bigot then gets outed, that's their own fault. They're not victims.

We’re talking about people having their lives judged by thousands of people online based on a 5-second video from someone with an agenda.

There’s no way for them to clarify, no way for them to “have their day in court,” apologizing just makes the mob smell blood. The only point is revenge and sadism, there’s no redemption, no point other than pain, pure and simple.

People are complicated and I don’t want a video of me on a bad day edited and then posted online for everyone to see.

Re: A university president makes a case against cowardice

#595

Post by theultdev »

cess11 wrote: post #591
robertlagrant wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> One ban consists of the exercise of their right to... Not associate with you. Many people have been fired / expelled / and many more silenced by those examples. If you can't tell the truth about your side (from how you're writing I assume you think in sides) then there's no point saying it. > The other sends you to a Salvadoran gulag. (The silence from all the 'free speech' folks on this point is deafening.) I have…

There's been a lot in usian news about people having been deported because of things like tattoo of the logo of some spanish or other soccer club. Here's one case where the deportation seems to be based mainly on having worn sports branded merch and a hoodie, and some supposed anonymous snitch, which the state has agreed was an error: https://www.newsweek.com/kilmar-armando-abrego-garcia-deport...

they agreed it was an error, to send him to that particular prison, not out of the country in general.

he is an illegal and his deportation defense in 2019 was he feared for his life from a "rival gang" indicating he was in the MS-13 gang that the feds and judge found him to be part of.

he's not just some "father", as the left leaning news likes to portray. he participated in human trafficking and himself admitted he was a gang member.

it seemed that the left did not care about vetting when gang members were coming into the country.

...but now they're being deported, it seems vetting is crucial (which is being done, but you're not always privy to (or aware of) the information)

and "anonymous snitch" is quite derogatory. you do know how evil MS-13 is right? listen to yourself.

they chop people up without blinking an eye. the fact someone risked their life to "snitch" saved so many people. this isn't playground shit.

Re: A university president makes a case against cowardice

#596

Post by [deleted] »

wat10000 wrote: post #558
rayiner wrote: post #551

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Americans can criticize their government all they want. Foreigners shouldn’t have no input in the american political system. The first amendment is the exception to the democratic rule, not the other way around.

Foreigners aren't allowed to vote or donate. They should be allowed to voice their opinions on the government, though. In my opinion, anyone who says foreigners in the country shouldn't criticize the government is less American than said foreigners.

[deleted]

Re: A university president makes a case against cowardice

#597

Post by foldr »

mancerayder wrote: post #580
slg wrote: post #539

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Not part of the rest of the conversation, just narrowing in on the idea of speech being free if there are consequences. That sounds like some sort of 1950's-era doublespeak. If there are consequences, how would speech be free? It's a very American-centric perspective that "Free Speech" is defined as "1st Amendment". Free speech means not getting fired, jumped, killed, poisoned, expelled, etc. Fired is something that…

Free speech doesn’t mean not getting fired. You can get fired in any county for things that you say (e.g. insulting your coworkers, lying to your boss, defaming your employer on social media, …). The exact laws and social conventions obviously vary from country to country, but this shouldn’t be a difficult concept in general.

Re: A university president makes a case against cowardice

#598

Post by rayiner »

archagon wrote: post #518
rayiner wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are shocked you might consider getting out of your bubble. A recent poll shows Americans support Trump’s deportation program 58-42: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/opinion-poll-trump-economy-tari... Meanwhile, 68% support the Supreme Court’s ban on Harvard’s affirmative action admissions policies: https://thehill.com/homenews/education/4411246-majority-supp... Universities, as institutions, were actively working…

Millions of people think the Earth is flat and that dinosaurs roamed the Earth alongside humans. Should universities be teaching that as well? Popularity is a poor barometer for educational value and policy.

[flagged]

Re: A university president makes a case against cowardice

#599

Post by megous »

thyristan wrote: post #392
immibis wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Germany bans pro-Palestine protests (officially they're still legal, but they've been arresting people since it began and they've just started deporting people for participating in completely legal protests) but I think that's a slightly different criterion than the one you asked for.

While the protests are per se not illegal, the people arrested aren't accused of just protesting, they are accused of supporting a terrorist organisation. The right to free speech isn't as all-encompassing in Germany as it is in the USA, so shouting the wrong slogans can very well get you in trouble. Also, the right to protest in public only applies to German citizens: https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/gg/art_8.html…

Non-citizens in Germany have no free speech rights period. You get banned and deported even for making lectures about unfavorable topics, as it seems.

That's quite different from protesting, since you're not making anyone listen to you. Lecture/conference is an offer, that Germans and others may take out of their own interest to learn about what you have to say.

That also infringes on the German citizens, because you're attempting to limit them from what they may choose to learn.

Re: A university president makes a case against cowardice

#600

Post by theultdev »

foldr wrote: post #597
mancerayder wrote: post #580

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not part of the rest of the conversation, just narrowing in on the idea of speech being free if there are consequences. That sounds like some sort of 1950's-era doublespeak. If there are consequences, how would speech be free? It's a very American-centric perspective that "Free Speech" is defined as "1st Amendment". Free speech means not getting fired, jumped, killed, poisoned, expelled, etc. Fired is something that…

Free speech doesn’t mean not getting fired. You can get fired in any county for things that you say (e.g. insulting your coworkers, lying to your boss, defaming your employer on social media, …). The exact laws and social conventions obviously vary from country to country, but this shouldn’t be a difficult concept in general.

Someone doxxing you and pressuring your employee to fire you because you said something they don't agree with politically is the same as you insulting your coworkers in your eyes?

You don't see any discrepancy between those two scenarios?

And you don't see anything wrong with the former scenario?

Post reply on HN