The latest campus cancellation is different

Post by FooBarBizBazz » Sun, Oct 10, 2021, 7:41 PM UTC

milesvp wrote: post #343

throwaway984393 wrote: post #270

Actually it's not different. University lecturers have been protested or cancelled for decades for reasons unrelated to their topic, usually due to political beliefs or corporate interests that clashed with students' ideals. "Cancel culture" is specifically about "personal" societal reforms, which is what makes it different than the older complaints about general politics. Back in the day it was "edgy" to protest or…

I’m not sure you’re correct that nothing is different. I saw a lecture recently by someone whose organization does mediation between student groups and universities with regards to free speech. He was saying that a few years ago for the first time his organization was starting to mediate in the opposite direction. Was a very interesting talk. The speaker had tried to commit suicide and in the process of recovering fr…

Post by rscoots » Sun, Oct 10, 2021, 7:46 PM UTC

morelisp wrote: post #410

rscoots wrote: post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's what you think, but I'm asking who at MIT has taken that position re timeframe that you have evidence of?

You have moved the goalposts immensely from "is Mounk's conclusion about Nazi comparisons accurate?" to "do you have proof from the horses's mouth that MIT would not have done this had he written this 5 years ago?"

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Oct 10, 2021, 7:58 PM UTC

WalterBright wrote: post #422

klyrs wrote: post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oldsters remember when this was a slower process, where people would write angry letters. They would undertake letter-writing campaigns, persuading others to take up the literary torch. They'd write to newspapers and magazines, where "free speech" was subject to the gatekeeping editor. Shorter screeds would appear in classified ads, again, to be censored if the editor didn't want to print what you had to say. It's fa…

> Writing quality and wit has definitely declined I concur. The skewering of Sarah Palin "I can see Russia from my house!" by SNL was brilliant. SNL's skewering of Trump just wasn't funny. Edit: Ok, if you disagree, note that everyone recognizes the SNL "I can see..." quote. Any memorable ones from SNL's Trump skits?

Post by civilized » Sun, Oct 10, 2021, 8:09 PM UTC

scythe wrote: post #183

mawise wrote: post #118

Seems like there were two things Abbot did "wrong", one was to argue against affirmative action, and the other was to use a nazi reference to make his point. Does anyone have first-hand knowledge of what the mob said on Twitter? I'm curious if they differentiated between the two. For anyone who hasn't seen it, Netflix's fiction THE CHAIR satires cancel culture in liberal institutions and their story includes someone…

There are really only two analogies he could have used, because there are only two cases in (post-Mongol) history where a nation with the best universities in the world experienced a calamitous fall from grace. One was in Nazi Germany. The other incident was Napoleon's conquest of France, Italy, and Spain, and the damage that was done by the anti-Church reforms imposed on those universities. This is a closer analogy,…

Post by morelisp » Sun, Oct 10, 2021, 8:24 PM UTC

rscoots wrote: post #443

morelisp wrote: post #410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have moved the goalposts immensely from "is Mounk's conclusion about Nazi comparisons accurate?" to "do you have proof from the horses's mouth that MIT would not have done this had he written this 5 years ago?"

I was rate limited. You brought up timeframe (and many other conditions) as a rebuttal to the author. I'm just pointing out that you can't be sure that any of those considerations even entered the minds of MIT's admins. I hope we can at least agree that this opaqueness is an issue and could inspire future, less-careful censors.