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

Texas A&M suspended professor accused of criticizing Lt. Gov. Patrick in lecture

texastribune.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 223 posts

Re: Texas A&M suspended professor accused of criticizing Lt. Gov. Patrick in lecture

#171

Post by ceejayoz »

vxNsr wrote: post #168
ceejayoz wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you think Trump's team only ever asked for one single tweet to come down, I don't know what to tell you. Again, censorship requests aren't a First Amendment violation. Joe Biden can request you go fuck yourself. He cannot order you to go fuck yourself. The Twitter Files make it quite clear Twitter etc. understood this distinction. For example, here's a Twitter Files post of them saying "go get a court order" to a…

omg, I just went through that thread in its entirety, it makes it very clear that Roth has a very cozy relationship with the FBI and his only issue was not wanting to change their stance wrt to mass surveillance, which was already compromised due to fisa warrants anyway.

I guess I missed the “Congress shall have no cozy relationships” amendment.

Re: Texas A&M suspended professor accused of criticizing Lt. Gov. Patrick in lecture

#172

Post by celu »

burnte wrote: post #158
celu wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many people believe what they teach works toward equality for all citizens, many people believe it undermines equality. Regardless, teaching one side of a current controversy as fact in mandatory school is manipulation.

"Regardless, teaching one side of a current controversy as fact in mandatory school is manipulation." If there were a real controversy, sure, but the sides here are "everyone is a human worthy of rights, protections, and opportunity," versus "some people deserve more and opportunity than others". One is tolerant, one is not. I am under no compulsion to be tolerant of intolerance. It is proper, ethical, and moral to f…

The issue here is 'being intolerant of intolerance' requires you to decide what is and isn't intolerant.

Let's take affirmative action for example. Giving people whose grandparents were negatively impacted by unjust laws more opportunities than other people.

Opposing this is not 'intolerance', it's an opinion in a debate about whether that is actually fair. It's an active debate and one side is trying to shut down opposition to their political goals and force their kids to say they're right

Trying to close all debate and push a narrative isn't democratic, it's authoritarian and one of the most common tools to oppress and control

Re: Texas A&M suspended professor accused of criticizing Lt. Gov. Patrick in lecture

#173

Post by jldugger »

neilv wrote: post #83
vkou wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Texas's attorney general has had been both state, and federally indicted for fraud for the past 8 years, and has successfully stalled the case, on the basis[1] that as long as he's a Republican politician, he can't get a fair trial. He's only been impeached for it this year . There is no oversight to be had in that kind of single-party state. If you're wondering about what the end game of that sort of thing looks lik…

How do tech workers in Texas cities like Austin feel about being under that?

Going by Blind comments, they are enthusiastically cheering the demise of California. For every "lived in texas, found a company" commenter there's like ten "relocated my job to a more sufficiently republican locale" fascist enablers.

Re: Texas A&M suspended professor accused of criticizing Lt. Gov. Patrick in lecture

#174

Post by xcrunner529 »

smsm42 wrote: post #160
amanaplanacanal wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The owners of social networks have free speech rights too. They can take others suggestions as to who and what to block and decide for themselves. The constitutional law is settled on this question. I wouldn’t be so quick to infringe that.

"Suggestions". Right. Regular meetings and demands from the government to shut down speech is just mere "suggestions". How stupid you think your target audience is?

[dead]

Re: Texas A&M suspended professor accused of criticizing Lt. Gov. Patrick in lecture

#175

Post by smsm42 »

ceejayoz wrote: post #161
smsm42 wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would seriously advise against using Wikipedia as an ultimate source for politically controversial topics, especially ones concerning fresh ongoing events. That said, the two last paragraphs is not actually an objection to anything I said, it's just saying "but also they plan to do other bad things". Maybe they do, maybe they don't - it doesn't change the nature of the particular thing they passed, and that's what…

It appears to be referencing this: https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2023-02-22/ty-article/.p... > The Knesset advanced a slew of proposals through preliminary readings on Wednesday – most notably the bill to enshrine the judicial override clause, which would permit the Knesset to override Supreme Court decisions by a very slim majority of 61 votes in the 120-seat parliament, effectively revoking its power to strik…

Thanks for the link. This is certainly a different bill, and not the one that has been recently passed. As such, it indeed looks quite ridiculous and reaching too far and basically makes Supreme Court completely powerless - because the government controls 61 votes by default, otherwise it falls. But it is not passed yet. If it does pass, then there's a reason to worry that the judicial review has been seriously impacted. But it didn't happen so far. And it looks like it won't ever: https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/politics-and-diplomacy/art...

As such, I suspect that it was just a bargaining move by Netanyahu to introduce something which clearly is going too far, with the full intent to drop it as soon as things get really going, to show he's reasonable and compromising. Maybe so, maybe he did intend to pass it if he can - in any case, I don't think that will happen anymore.

Re: Texas A&M suspended professor accused of criticizing Lt. Gov. Patrick in lecture

#177

Post by RickJWagner »

Animats wrote: post #26

Crackdowns on free speech are increasing worldwide. Afghanistan, Russia, China, Hong Kong, Florida, Texas... Israel just reached the using fire hoses on protestors level.[1] [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/25/world/middleeast/israel-j...

I wish we could read exactly what was said. It might be something reasonable for a professional to say, or it might be way out of line.

Until we know, I don't think we can say if this is an attack on free speech or not.

Re: Texas A&M suspended professor accused of criticizing Lt. Gov. Patrick in lecture

#178

Post by amanaplanacanal »

smsm42 wrote: post #160
amanaplanacanal wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The owners of social networks have free speech rights too. They can take others suggestions as to who and what to block and decide for themselves. The constitutional law is settled on this question. I wouldn’t be so quick to infringe that.

"Suggestions". Right. Regular meetings and demands from the government to shut down speech is just mere "suggestions". How stupid you think your target audience is?

I don’t have a target audience. I’m just telling you the way it works. As far as I can tell the only place in the US that government is actually threatening private companies over their speech is Florida.

Re: Texas A&M suspended professor accused of criticizing Lt. Gov. Patrick in lecture

#179

Post by rayiner »

idopmstuff wrote: post #104
rayiner wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> How is repercussions for criticizing your employer a free speech issue? When your employer is the government, it clearly is. The biggest reason we have free speech in this country is so that the government cannot punish people for speaking up against it.

That doesn’t mean that government employers must allow employees to say whatever they want: https://www.acludc.org/en/know-your-rights/federal-employee-...

For public employee speech to be protected, you must be speaking:

> 1) as a private citizen, > 2) about a matter of public concern, and > 3) your speech does not interfere with your job

A government-employed lecturer speaking within the scope of her lecture isn’t speaking in a private capacity, hence it’s not a free speech issue.

Re: Texas A&M suspended professor accused of criticizing Lt. Gov. Patrick in lecture

#180

Post by bozhark »

ecf wrote: post #116
bozhark wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Israel just removed their judicial branches ability to review government actions. The hose just got a lot bigger.

The amount of taxpayer $$$ that Israel claws from the US in the name of religion was already quite sickening. Now they’re getting that money while simultaneously switching to a totalitarian government.

Switching?
Post reply on HN