Fully Baked Left Wing Vegan Cookies

robindch · 22-05-2017 10:20am

Peregrinus wrote: »

Or, to put it more plainly, the fact that a particular journal will publish sh!te does nothing to suggest that a particular discipline produces a disproportionate share of sh!te. It just shows that the journal in question is bogus.

For clarity, I don't especially disagree with your general claim - see above for the post where I point out that the authors' claim about gender studies being disproportionately open to publishing sh!te is, at best, "not disproven".

However, it's fun to note that the CSS website is sleek, modern, busy and filled with well-formatted articles, while the IJACT website is old, creaking, almost empty and containing poorly-formatted articles. This suggests, on an entirely inadequate sample base of just two bogus journals, that there's better money to be made faking articles in gender studies - increasing one's confidence, proportionately to the evidence of course - in the authors' original hypothesis.

Incidentally, the IJACT seems not to have published the "Get Me Off Your F*cking Mailing List" article. The CSS website, on the other hand, is still leaving the "Penis as Construct" article dangling around in public, for all to see:

https://www.cogentoa.com/article/10.1080/23311886.2017.1330439

Christy42 · 22-05-2017 12:25pm

robindch wrote: »

For clarity, I don't especially disagree with your general claim - see above for the post where I point out that the authors' claim about gender studies being disproportionately open to publishing sh!te is, at best, "not disproven".

However, it's fun to note that the CSS website is sleek, modern, busy and filled with well-formatted articles, while the IJACT website is old, creaking, almost empty and containing poorly-formatted articles. This suggests, on an entirely inadequate sample base of just two bogus journals, that there's better money to be made faking articles in gender studies - increasing one's confidence, proportionately to the evidence of course - in the authors' original hypothesis.

Incidentally, the IJACT seems not to have published the "Get Me Off Your F*cking Mailing List" article. The CSS website, on the other hand, is still leaving the "Penis as Construct" article dangling around in public, for all to see:

https://www.cogentoa.com/article/10.1080/23311886.2017.1330439

The fact that the journal had a half decent Web designer on staff at some point does not make it a respected journal. It really reads as if you have a conclusion and are sorting the argument to fit.

This is just the first link I found, there may be better but it is interesting to note it does not seem to be in the top tier of gender studies journals http://www.scimagojr.com/journalrank.php?category=3318&page=3&total_size=115

Note: this should not be construed as a defense of gender studies as a field. Merely that I do not believe the arguments being presented against it are well founded logically.

Peregrinus · 23-05-2017 1:45am

What Christy said. The Cogent business model generates revenue from authors, not from subscribers, so a bit of marketing investment in a website that will induce authors to spend money to be published make sense.

For the record, I don't object to a degree of scepticism about the academic rigour of gender studies, and I entirely accept computert science/computer technology an academically respectable and rigorous discipline. My point is that a study of the phenomenon of pay-to-publish academic journals can do little to illuminate or verify concerns about this.

If somebody wants to argue that there's a lot more pay-to-publish journals per academic in gender studies than in the STEM disciplines, fine; assemble your evidence and mount the argument. Then you might have established something about gender studies. But "Look! I found a bogus pay-to-publish journal in the field of gender studies!" tells me precisely zero about the field of gender studies.

(It does tell me something about the people who think it says anything meaningful about gender studies, though.)

robindch · 23-05-2017 8:48am

Christy42 wrote: »

The fact that the journal had a half decent Web designer on staff at some point does not make it a respected journal.

Um, I didn't say it did:

robindch wrote:

This suggests, on an entirely inadequate sample base of just two bogus journals, that there's better money to be made faking articles in gender studies [...]

robindch · 23-05-2017 9:02am

Peregrinus wrote: »

If somebody wants to argue that there's a lot more pay-to-publish journals per academic in gender studies than in the STEM disciplines, fine; assemble your evidence and mount the argument. Then you might have established something about gender studies. But "Look! I found a bogus pay-to-publish journal in the field of gender studies!" tells me precisely zero about the field of gender studies.

As I mentioned above somewhere, the fact that there's pay-to-publish in gender studies means that there's a market for this kind of thing and therefore, that there are at least some people working in gender-studies who are prepared to lower their standards in order to get published.

The existence of a single bogus journal doesn't say anything about the scale of the problem, but it would be interesting and useful to look into this further to figure out - for instance - within gender-studies, how many journals do accept pay-for-publish, how many people publish in these journals, how many relevant articles appear in these journals and of these, how many are cited by not-pay-for-publish, and whether the same people publish in both types of journal. Then, compare these figures with STEM-related fields and see how things pan out.

On the inadequate basis of the two journals cited here (the one I cited and the one you cited), there's quality-related evidence that gender-studies are more open to abuse.

But again, more research is needed to establish reliably whether that's incidental from the choice of journal or whether it's a general trend - I suspect the latter and you are refusing to draw any conclusion of any kind - fair enough

Christy42 · 23-05-2017 9:19am

robindch wrote: »

Um, I didn't say it did:

If it is inadequate then why mention it?

It is incredibly inadequate to the point where it should not be mentioned till more evidence is garnered. The journals in question should also not be specifically targeted as easy to publish in with respect to the rest of gender studies (which is how I suspect this journal was chosen).

I mean there is so much wrong with this as evidence it is embarrassing to present this right now. Further evidence is required-evidence is meaningless as is.

Peregrinus · 23-05-2017 9:28am

robindch wrote: »

Incidentally, the IJACT seems not to have published the "Get Me Off Your F*cking Mailing List" article. The CSS website, on the other hand, is still leaving the "Penis as Construct" article dangling around in public, for all to see:

https://www.cogentoa.com/article/10.1080/23311886.2017.1330439

That's because the authors of the piece submitted to the IJACT didn't pay, and "pay for publish" means what it says. If you don't pay them $150, they don't publish the article.

CSS, by contrast, has a "pay what you can" business model. The "recommended" article publishing charge is $1,350, but you can pitch for a lower charge or a nil charge, and furthermore you don't pay until invoiced, which is on publication date.

I don't know whether Lindsay and Boyle pitched for a nil charge, or whether they simply didn't pay the invoice.

Presumably, Cogent collects or hopes to collect the full recommended charge in the majority of cases.

It's notable that it's nine times larger than the charge levied by the IJACT. The generally sexier look and feel of the Cogent website may be related with the need to persuade academics who are seeking to improve their publishing metrics that an off-print of (or link to) an article published in Cogent is going to look, at least superficially, somewhat credible, and therefore it's worth paying the relatively high charge.

There's a fundamental flaw, I think, in attempting to perpetrate a Sokal-type hoax using a pay-to-publish journal. The acceptance of a rubbish article proves that the journal has no effective critical standards. But, hey, it's a pay-to-publish journal; we knew that already. If you're trying to establish something about the discipline in question, you need to submit your article to regular journals - and if, as happened here, it's turned down by one regular journal, then submit it to another, and keep submitting it until accepted. Getting it accepted by a pay-to-publish journal just proves what we already know - you can get anything accepted by a pay-to-publish journal.

On edit: FWIW, I think the whole phenomenon of pay-to-publish academic journals, and the erosion of academic rigour, is largely a product of the bureaucratisation and commodification of higher education. Academics pay to publish not to gratify their vanity, but because professional advancement (or, increasingly, simply keeping the job they currently have) depends on crude metrics like number of articles published. And those metrics are chosen not because they are particularly meaningful, but because they are easily measured.

This is a problem, but I don't think it's a problem particularly confined to gender studies, or to the social sciences at large. FWIW, a connection of mine is an academic in a medical school; it's a huge problem in that field. I see no reason why other STEM fields would be exempt.

There may well be an issue with academic rigour in gender studies and other fields, but I think trying to demonstrate it by wading into the swamp of pay-to-publish journals is a fruitless exercise, because how are you going to disentangle the two issues? Even if you could show that there was more pay-to-publish shenanigans going on in gender studies than in computer science, that wouldn't necessarily tell you anything intrinsic about gender studies (or about computer science). It might just tell you that the forces and circumstances which have given rise to this problem are affected gender studies more than computer science.

Back to basics, here. If we're trying to test for academic rigour in gender studies, we need to devise a better experiment.

silverharp · 13-06-2017 8:56am

regressive students force lecturers off campus

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3SdJhJ2lps

recedite · 13-06-2017 3:23pm

Difficult to understand what is going on there, but it seems that black students had been absenting themselves from the college for one day every year on an official Day of Absence. The idea being, apparently, that everyone else would miss them, after everything fell apart on that day. And then the others would all be delighted when they returned.

It seems this was not working too well, because things carried on pretty much as normal. So they decided instead to forcibly "absent" any white people from the college.
Good interview from the man himself here....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-st73zhZL3A

silverharp · 13-06-2017 5:15pm

he was interviewed the other day, he still hasn't been back on campus as no one can guarantee his security. Hopefully their student numbers crash. It would now be toxic to have that college on your CV. It might push them to do something

recedite · 14-06-2017 3:35pm

silverharp wrote: »

he still hasn't been back on campus as no one can guarantee his security...

Its lucky he's a jew, otherwise he'd be a racist nazi. And punching nazis is a thing, apparently.

robindch · 14-06-2017 4:55pm

recedite wrote: »

Difficult to understand what is going on there [...]

Hardly surprising - it's Tucker Carlson on Fox News!

silverharp · 14-06-2017 6:06pm

robindch wrote: »

Hardly surprising - it's Tucker Carlson on Fox News!

ah come now, the fact that it is fox news or Carson is not a factor here. its an open goal for any reporter

silverharp · 14-06-2017 6:10pm

recedite wrote: »

Its lucky he's a jew, otherwise he'd be a racist nazi. And punching nazis is a thing, apparently.

he has been called a racist though, see anti nazis below

PopePalpatine · 14-06-2017 6:41pm

Oh look, it's Breitbart pandering to their fanboys' prejudices.

14-06-2017 8:35pm

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Oh look, it's Breitbart pandering to their fanboys' prejudices.

fanpersons, lest you reveal your latent misogyny.

Cambridge University examiners told it is sexist to use the word 'genius' to describe students

Word Policing is bizarre.

silverharp · 14-06-2017 9:17pm

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Oh look, it's Breitbart pandering to their fanboys' prejudices.

in fairness I wouldnt expect students from a STEM field to be chasing Jews off campus. You clearly think they are justified?

PopePalpatine · 14-06-2017 9:20pm

silverharp wrote: »

in fairness I wouldnt expect students from a STEM field to be chasing Jews off campus. You clearly think they are justified?

Where did you infer that I think they're justified in trying to force Weinstein out of a job? Was it just that I bothered copying the image's source URL, pasted it into my browser and noted that it was Breitbart, the rag of choice of the alt-right?

silverharp · 14-06-2017 10:09pm

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Where did you infer that I think they're justified in trying to force Weinstein out of a job? Was it just that I bothered copying the image's source URL, pasted it into my browser and noted that it was Breitbart, the rag of choice of the alt-right?

I googled searched the image, means nothing to me that its from Breitbart, if its fake for sure point it out. but to me the salient point is about conduct on a US campus and all im getting is deflection, hence wondering

recedite · 14-06-2017 10:31pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Cambridge University examiners told it is sexist to use the word 'genius' to describe students

Word Policing is bizarre.

We're rewriting our first two years of our History degree...
...to really try and root out the unhelpful and very vague talk of ?genius?, of ?brilliance?, of ?flair? which carries assumptions of gender inequality and also of class and ethnicity.

You'd think it would be racist and/or sexist to assume these attributes were only associated with a particular gender/ethnicity, but now we learn that its the opposite, apparently.

robindch · 14-06-2017 10:37pm

silverharp wrote: »

[...] the fact that it is fox news or Carson is not a factor here [...]

Carlson specifically, and Fox News generally, generate and broadcast fear, hate and ignorance. Carlson seems to run a regular segment on his show named "Campus Craziness" in which he dedicates an inordinate amount of his media show to a blend of angry students doing stupid things and stupid college administrators doing stupid things. The aim here isn't to provide viewers with a balanced view of university life in general within the USA, but to inflame viewers as one can infer quite safely from Carlson's continuous urgings, his eye-rolling, cheek-puffing and toe-curlingly leading questions. And from the 4,000 or so demeaning, incendiary and violent comments posted in the in the youtube comments section for that clip - violent comments which, btw, far exceed any of the administrative actions threatened by the students concerned.

The top comments for the video include "the police should have started billy clubbing those mother fuckers in the face, pussy and balls"; "Is there any white supremacy group you recommend? I don't know but I feel the need to join one"; "Parenting fail. You should be ashamed of yourself to raising a kid like this. Ghe police should grow a spin and throw tear gas at this cunts that seem to think they are above the law." and the splendidly ironic "I can't imagine how pathetic it must be to live your life perpetually offended and protesting. I've only known a handful of people like that and they are all miserable.". I'm assuming that these comments are legit.

As regards the incident itself, yes, a number of what appear to be angry students are shouting at Weinstein and one is demanding that he resigns, but there wasn't any significant information about what lead up to this, who these people were, nor why the main shouter, nor the others of the "around 50" people present, were implied to speak for the entire student population of around 4,000 students - the vast majority of whom, I think we can safely assume - do not support the people doing the shouting.

There may indeed be genuine race-related problems on US campuses but Carlson's reporting on this incident is so trivially bent that it can only be classed as cheap, low-end, inflammatory propaganda and Weinstein himself should have known better than to appear on Carlson's low-end, inflammatory media show.

Separately, Carlson's stated view that a few angry people amounted to something like the fall of "Phnom Penh in 1975" really does need to be singled out as especially stupid :rolleyes:

recedite · 14-06-2017 10:45pm

Bernie Sanders moves quickly to dissociate himself from a Trump-hating former volunteer campaign worker for the democrats who opened fire on some republican congressmen playing baseball.

Sanders condemned the shooting. "I have just been informed that the alleged shooter at the Republican baseball practice is someone who apparently volunteered on my presidential campaign," he said. "I am sickened by this despicable act. Let me be as clear as I can be. Violence of any kind is unacceptable in our society and I condemn this action in the strongest possible terms."

Sanders is a smart guy. A lot of his followers are not.

Peregrinus · 15-06-2017 4:18am

recedite wrote: »

Sanders is a smart guy. A lot of his followers are not.

With respect to Trump, we could only make one of those two statements.

silverharp · 15-06-2017 8:32am

robindch wrote: »

As regards the incident itself, yes, a number of what appear to be angry students are shouting at Weinstein and one is demanding that he resigns, but there wasn't any significant information about what lead up to this, who these people were, nor why the main shouter, nor the others of the "around 50" people present, were implied to speak for the entire student population of around 4,000 students - the vast majority of whom, I think we can safely assume - do not support the people doing the shouting.

There may indeed be genuine race-related problems on US campuses but Carlson's reporting on this incident is so trivially bent that it can only be classed as cheap, low-end, inflammatory propaganda and Weinstein himself should have known better than to appear on Carlson's low-end, inflammatory media show.

Separately, Carlson's stated view that a few angry people amounted to something like the fall of "Phnom Penh in 1975" really does need to be singled out as especially stupid :rolleyes:

as far as I can see the college administrators have either taken the side of these students or are afraid to act. I'd expect these students to be disciplined or expelled yet as far as I am aware the Prof isnt back teaching yet even though he did nothing wrong.

silverharp · 15-06-2017 8:37am

recedite wrote: »

Bernie Sanders moves quickly to dissociate himself from a Trump-hating former volunteer campaign worker for the democrats who opened fire on some republican congressmen playing baseball.

Sanders is a smart guy. A lot of his followers are not.

I'd blame the media , people have been saying that their coverage would lead to killings by a more suggestible type of person

here are his fav shows :pac:

DCSm9vmXkAAfgST.jpg:small

NinjaKirby · 15-06-2017 12:58pm

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Oh look, it's Breitbart pandering to their fanboys' prejudices.

This is a really weird way of thinking.

I get that Breitbart have an obvious and blatant bias and I think it's clear who a large chunk of their target audience is BUT I don't really understand why any facts that they might report are discredited immediately.

You can't deny reality just because the people informing you of that reality have other views that are... questionable. (I think "questionable" might be understating it)

If the weatherman weatherperson is telling you that it will rain tomorrow and then it turns out they are actually literally a Nazi? Well that doesn't impact the weather forecast does it.

Do people consider the possibility that engaging in this left vs right battle for extended periods can have a negative effect on their ability to engage rationally?

NinjaKirby · 15-06-2017 1:11pm

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Where did you infer that I think they're justified in trying to force Weinstein out of a job? Was it just that I bothered copying the image's source URL, pasted it into my browser and noted that it was Breitbart, the rag of choice of the alt-right?

:eek:

Oh noes. Not the Alt-Right!! DUN DUN DUN! Ahhhhhh...

Jeez.

I think we should call this the "Alt-Right of the Gaps" fallacy.

You know, when someone has to invoke the dreaded label Alt-Right to explain why something is bad or why someone is bad.

So you saw this image online of these apparently vigilante kids wielding baseball bats and went into the url and ermahgerd it was from Breitbart and everyone knows Breitbart is alt-right so this story must be false or nonsense or not worth mentioning.

PopePalpatine, how do you define "alt-right"?

seamus · 15-06-2017 1:20pm

robindch wrote: »

The aim here isn't to provide viewers with a balanced view of university life in general within the USA, but to inflame viewers as one can infer quite safely from Carlson's continuous urgings, his eye-rolling, cheek-puffing and toe-curlingly leading questions.

The aim is to pander to anti-intellectualism, which is one of the hallmarks of the extreme right. Continue pretending that universities are just factories churning out limp-wristed leftie libruls and the people who believe that "real learnin'" comes from physical labour and shooting things will continue to slap their fins together.

This is what advertising has done to the private media. They find their niche and milk it for all it's worth; no interest in balance or honesty, simply pander to your listeners' confirmation bias and that money keeps rolling in.

(And yes, this is not an exclusively conservative thing.)

robindch · 15-06-2017 1:27pm

silverharp wrote: »

as far as I can see the college administrators have either taken the side of these students or are afraid to act.

That's correct, at least according to Carlson's media show anyway. Given Carlson's obvious bias, it would seem wise to assume that the full story is less one-sided.

Other reports indicate that the story and Weinstein's various media appearances have led to students at the university being doxx'd and - as with the video above - direct threats of violence have been made against the students concerned, threats which far, far exceeded the protestations of the angry students.

The campus has also been targetted by Patriot Prayer, a loose alt-right/fascist organization which is holding something which they refer to as a "Free Speech" event today at the college. Previous Patriot Prayer meetings have attracted Jeremy Christian, the white supremacist who, last month, murdered two people who asked him to stop verbally abusing two islamic girls.

http://www.thestranger.com/news/2017/06/14/25216539/go-back-to-the-zoo-how-evergreen-state-college-became-a-target-for-right-wing-trolls

One wonders whether Fox generally, or Carlson and his media show in particular, will detail the doxx'ing of students, any threats of violence made against them, and especially, the link between Patriot Prayer and Jeremy Christian. I'm going to suggest that these things will either be played down or entirely ignored - as befits a cheap propagandist working for an unpleasant propaganda outlet.

silverharp · 15-06-2017 1:29pm

seamus wrote: »

The aim is to pander to anti-intellectualism, which is one of the hallmarks of the extreme right. Continue pretending that universities are just factories churning out limp-wristed leftie libruls and the people who believe that "real learnin'" comes from physical labour and shooting things will continue to slap their fins together.

This is what advertising has done to the private media. They find their niche and milk it for all it's worth; no interest in balance or honesty, simply pander to your listeners' confirmation bias and that money keeps rolling in.

(And yes, this is not an exclusively conservative thing.)

on the plus side there is a "cut the cord" thing happening. All the cable news networks will end up with a audience primarily made up of people in retirement homes. Fox CNN and MSNBC are all biased as fk , their demise is welcomed

robindch · 15-06-2017 1:35pm

NinjaKirby wrote: »

I get that Breitbart have an obvious and blatant bias and I think it's clear who a large chunk of their target audience is BUT I don't really understand why any facts that they might report are discredited immediately.

Breitbart, so far as I'm aware, don't invent quotations from individuals or publications, but that's about as far as they go with respect to the norms of respectable journalism.

The rest of their unending flood of hate-ridden output is so bent as to be completely worthless if one wishes to come to a balanced view of whatever it is that they happen to be screaming and fist-waving about at any given time.

Their aim is not to inform people, but to inflame them - I'd have thought this was really quite obvious.

silverharp · 15-06-2017 1:40pm

robindch wrote: »

That's correct, at least according to Carlson's media show anyway. Given Carlson's obvious bias, it would seem wise to assume that the full story is less one-sided.

Other reports indicate that the story and Weinstein's various media appearances have led to students at the university being doxx'd and - as with the video above - direct threats of violence have been made against the students concerned, threats which far, far exceeded the protestations of the angry students.

The campus has also been targetted by Patriot Prayer, a loose alt-right/fascist organization which is holding something which they refer to as a "Free Speech" event today at the college. Previous Patriot Prayer meetings have attracted Jeremy Christian, the white supremacist who, last month, murdered two people who asked him to stop verbally abusing two islamic girls.

http://www.thestranger.com/news/2017/06/14/25216539/go-back-to-the-zoo-how-evergreen-state-college-became-a-target-for-right-wing-trolls

One wonders whether Fox generally, or Carlson and his media show in particular, will detail the doxx'ing of students, any threats of violence made against them, and especially, the link between Patriot Prayer and Jeremy Christian. I'm going to suggest that these things will either be played down or entirely ignored - as befits a cheap propagandist working for an unpleasant propaganda outlet.

what was the guy supposed to do? he is the innocent party here that stood up to bullying by students of all things. the only ironic thing is that the good lecturer was a Bernie bro progressive so he may have contributed to the atmosphere in the college in the past.
I havnt follwed the doxing side of it but you cant keep reality at bay all the time, if you put yourself out there as a bad actor, bully, you might get recognised.

robindch · 15-06-2017 2:39pm

silverharp wrote: »

what was the guy supposed to do?

Weinstein should have been aware of the likely consequences - to himself, his college and its students - of actively contributing to the Fox News hate-mill.

The article I quoted above indicates that, too late, Weinstein realized the error of his ways and called for restraint, but it seems to have been too late to stop the alt-right/fascists from taking up his cause and they ignored him.

silverharp · 15-06-2017 2:50pm

robindch wrote: »

Weinstein should have been aware of the likely consequences - to himself, his college and its students - of actively contributing to the Fox News hate-mill.

The article I quoted above indicates that, too late, Weinstein realized the error of his ways and called for restraint, but it seems to have been too late to stop the alt-right/fascists from taking up his cause and they ignored him.

he went on the Rubin report as well only I don't have the time to watch a 2 hour show about it. He was also on Rogan show. He has pretty mush talked to whoever would listen to him. It still comes back to the fact that what happened was outrageous , the students involved should probably be expelled in particular ones going around the campus with bats (if such a thing happened) and the college need to let it be known that they run things not a bunch of extremist students.
I wouldn't have thought the alt-right/fascists would come to the rescue of a Jewish liberal , he wouldn't fit their demographic

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-fEAPcgxnyY

recedite · 15-06-2017 5:47pm

robindch wrote: »

The article I quoted above indicates that, too late, Weinstein realized the error of his ways and called for restraint, but it seems to have been too late to stop the alt-right/fascists from taking up his cause and they ignored him.

Are you referring to this ?...

Weinstein and his wife, Heather Heying, also a biology instructor at Evergreen, told The Chronicle of Higher Education that Fox News went against their left-leaning values, but defending against what they viewed as an assault on free speech seemed more important.

Nothing there indicates regret, nor is there anything to say "he realized the error of his ways".
It seems to me that the "fascist hate-mill" as you call them, were the principal media willing to report on his situation, and so he chose to give them an interview rather than suffer in silence.

robindch · 15-06-2017 7:08pm

recedite wrote: »

Are you referring to this ? [...] Nothing there indicates regret, nor is there anything to say "he realized the error of his ways".

No, I'm referring to this bit:

TheStranger wrote:

Although Weinstein issued a call to his Twitter followers to end the doxxing campaigns against "those that protested against [him]," it wasn't enough to stop the flood of threats.

recedite wrote: »

It seems to me that the "fascist hate-mill" as you call them, were the principal media willing to report on his situation, and so he chose to give them an interview rather than suffer in silence.

I haven't referred to anybody or anything as the "fascist hate-mill" and the term does not appear in what I've written - please do pay attention

I have referred, in some places, to the "Fox News hate-mill" and, elsewhere, the "alt-right/fascist" community which feeds off the Fox News hate-mill - one is enthusiastic producer and the other is voracious consumer.

To refer, as you do, to the "fascist hate-mill" is to misunderstand, at a fundamental level, how Fox News interacts with its consumer base and what the role of each is.

silverharp · 15-06-2017 8:15pm

robindch wrote: »

To refer, as you do, to the "fascist hate-mill" is to misunderstand, at a fundamental level, how Fox News interacts with its consumer base and what the role of each is.

the median age of Fox news viewer is 68, I think you are giving them too much credit. although it would be amusing to think of little old ladies engaging in online trolling

Still not looking good for him, college behaving badly. sad!

https://heatst.com/culture-wars/bret-weinstein-says-evergreen-state-college-is-lying-about-his-return-to-campus/

Speaking to The Olympian, a school spokesperson said on Tuesday that Weinstein returned to teach classes at the college “just over a week ago” in his “normally assigned classroom,” and that the professor was told there was “additional law enforcement presence on campus.”

But directly contradicting that, Weinstein told the newspaper that he hasn’t been on campus since the start of the month, and accused the college of lying if they said otherwise, per College Fix. “If college administrators say I was on campus last week, they are lying,” he told The Olympian.

“I left campus when it was evacuated on the morning of June 1,” he added. “I held my afternoon class in a downtown park that day, and left the state with my family that evening. We have not been in Washington since, and some administrators know that.”

“The Evergreen State College [is] now openly and nakedly lying to the press about Bret Weinstein,” he wrote on Twitter. “This is the first failed US college and its president is nuts.”

On Monday, Weinstein told Tucker Carlson on his Fox News show that he didn’t know if it was safe to return to teaching at the Washington college, which has had issues with roaming mobs of social justice warriors armed with baseball bats. Police told him that they were ordered not to offer him any protection.

robindch · 15-06-2017 9:14pm

silverharp wrote: »

He has pretty mush talked to whoever would listen to him.

That seems to be about the height of it.

Perhaps things would be less messy if he hadn't spent so much of his time fanning the flames of hatred on Fox News and similar media outlets.

robindch · 15-06-2017 9:18pm

silverharp wrote: »

https://heatst.com/culture-wars/bret-weinstein-says-evergreen-state-college-is-lying-about-his-return-to-campus/

"Heatst" is another trash media outlet which really doesn't belong in a forum like A+A.

silverharp · 16-06-2017 7:43am

robindch wrote: »

"Heatst" is another trash media outlet which really doesn't belong in a forum like A+A.

on the assumption that you arent just a partisan hack, would you say the same about CNN, Buzzfeed and similar?

16-06-2017 9:06am

robindch wrote: »

That seems to be about the height of it.

Perhaps things would be less messy if he hadn't spent so much of his time fanning the flames of hatred on Fox News and similar media outlets.

Aye, he should just accept the punishment for his heinous crimes.

robindch · 16-06-2017 9:13am

silverharp wrote: »

on the assumption that you arent just a partisan hack, would you say the same about CNN, Buzzfeed and similar?

Not sure what you mean by "similar". There are plenty of media outlets like the BBC, CNN which have reasonably good journalistic standards which they've built up over time and which their reporters generally stick to. These outlets cover a wide range of stories from a wide range of topics from a wide range of countries and from a wide range of generally reliable angles.

HeatStreet - not a site I've ever heard of before yesterday - seems to cater to a consumer base of angry, white males - to judge by the narrow range of articles it provides. The articles are frequently sexist or racist or anti-immigrant etc, etc, against a background air of snide and nasty trollery.

Basically, it's a shit-stirring website which has no place in any respectable discussion beyond use as an example of a trash media outlet. Hence my comment above.

silverharp · 16-06-2017 9:44am

robindch wrote: »

Not sure what you mean by "similar". There are plenty of media outlets like the BBC, CNN which have reasonably good journalistic standards which they've built up over time and which their reporters generally stick to. These outlets cover a wide range of stories from a wide range of topics from a wide range of countries and from a wide range of generally reliable angles.

HeatStreet - not a site I've ever heard of before yesterday - seems to cater to a consumer base of angry, white males - to judge by the narrow range of articles it provides. The articles are frequently sexist or racist or anti-immigrant etc, etc, against a background air of snide and nasty trollery.

Basically, it's a shit-stirring website which has no place in any respectable discussion beyond use as an example of a trash media outlet. Hence my comment above.

CNN is similar to Fox in that they both shill for their political side , if you went to Youtube and searched for CNN "fake news" you would come across a bunch of streams from their news where they clearly aren't being objective.
As for heatstreet , I don't know anything about them I don't go to news sites but that story from them was on the first page of a google search.
Ok so here is a Huff post piece on the same thing, and my understanding of the huff post is that it is quiet regressive itself but this article is on point

A good piece, actually surprised you aren't more sympathetic to the guy, you seem to have a view that if Fox have covered it you have to have the opposite opinion

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/a-liberals-perspective-evergreen-college-and-the_us_5932d7a2e4b062a6ac0ad024

A Liberal’s Perspective: Evergreen College And The Fascism Of The Illiberal Left

At Evergreen State College in Washington, the dangerous authoritarian streak of college-aged, left-wing extremists is being exposed in disturbing detail. In recent weeks, social justice activists asked that white students refrain from attending class or being present on campus on a predetermined day, in order to appropriately, from their perspective, observe the traditional “Day of Absence.” Evolutionary Biology Professor Bret Weinstein wrote an email objecting to this event, in part, saying that to get every white member of campus to leave would be “an act of oppression in and of itself,” Weeks later, when this email became public, it did not take long for a mob to assemble.

For his objection to “A Day Without White People,” Weinstein was speciously accused of being a racist. Additionally, a group of students cornered other white faculty and proceeded to viciously berate them. Footage of these confrontations are available online, bringing the incident to public attention and landing Weinstein in a media firestorm.

According to Weinstein, the college administration has done little to protect him and give him a platform to defend himself from utterly unfounded allegations of racism and calls for his ouster from the classroom. Police barely intervened when students organized into angry mobs and screamed insults and vulgarities at administrators, completely disregarding the notion that faculty and administration have any authority over students, who can apparently openly disrespect them with impunity.

The irony in all of this is that Weinstein himself is a liberal, having supported Bernie Sanders for president. There is no evidence that he is a racist and he has done nothing to these students but object to their authoritarian mentality and attempt to have an open dialogue. So why are these left-wing extremists attacking one of their own liberal comrades? The answer is simple: they are not liberals. They are illiberal, left-wing fascists.

These so called “activists” are not interested in dialogue — one of them said exactly that in a video of their confrontation. They are only interested in their political agenda being enacted at all costs, without any negotiation with dissenters. To me, that mentality is inherently illiberal and undemocratic. It is close enough to fascism to warrant use of the label “fascist” at this point.

We need a more functional word for these individuals. Up until now, they are usually ironically referred to as “social justice warriors” (SJW). That term intends to emphasize their self-serving thirst to signal personal virtue via “activism” in support of marginalized groups.

Again, I know that left-wing fascism is somewhat of an oxymoron. I’m trying to make a broader point about what we call the social justice mob when it arises and why we call them that. As a label, “social justice warrior” just doesn’t cut it. It has too much of a positive connotation and can be embraced all too easily as the cool, rebellious thing to be.

The majority of Americans who utterly reject the ridiculous behavior of this growing group must not let the extremists control the narrative by characterizing their behavior as being politically rebellious or “on the right side of history.” Instead, this behavior must be portrayed as it truly is, as a shameful and pedestrian surrender to authoritarian political doctrine and mob mentality.

Considering this, “fascist” works fairly well as a label for members of the social justice mob. It drives home their authoritarian, ideologically-possessed mindset and tactics which can only be described as systematic brainwashing followed by witch hunts for any who would even think to diverge from the social justice orthodoxy.

And for those who think I’m going a step too far and overreacting, watch the videos from Evergreen State, as well as the endless additional footage of ‘social justice warrior’ mobs and “protests” of college speakers available on YouTube. Witness the actions of these people and how no one steps up to correct them.

Watch as they hospitalize a female professor at Middlebury College and receive minimal consequences. Watch as they set University of California, Berkeley ablaze because of the presence of a dissenting political voice.

Now, you can watch as they physically and verbally intimidate faculty and students at their own institution, terrorizing them for the heinous crime of being present while white.

Additionally, I implore you to imagine what the university and police response would have been if conservative students had made similar demands in a similar manner. In this case, the students would have been ordered to disperse. They would have been disciplined or even arrested for not complying with school policy. This double standard starkly displays the danger of a far-left ideological mob that is exempt from otherwise enforced social and legal consequences.

To be frank, if this ordeal does not boil your blood and make you want to fight the regressive left and campus extremism, then you are either ideologically possessed or intellectually blind. For the rest of us, there is clearly fight on our hands for the heart of Western civilization which calls on all of us to speak up.

These fascists must be disempowered via the very right they fear most, freedom of speech, which manifests itself in open dialogue leading to the exposure of their ideas as inferior to the core values that make Western civilization the pinnacle of humanity.

Additionally, college administrators and police must hold students accountable for their actions, as they would with any other group. They must not do what Evergreen College administrators have done and be intimidated by a small, but extremely vocal, group of students who have terrorized their own campus community in an ideological conquest — not for truth, but for confirmation of a dogmatic narrative.

As with Professor Weinstein, I am no conservative. I am the former president of the College Democrats of Maryland. However, this insanity is unrepresentative of true liberalism. Liberals who don’t call out these illiberal fascists are complicit in their growing influence and impunity. We real liberals must wake up, we must stand up, and we must act.

NinjaKirby · 16-06-2017 10:11am

silverharp wrote: »

Ok so here is a Huff post piece on the same thing, and my understanding of the huff post is that it is quiet regressive itself but this article is on point

A good piece, actually surprised you aren't more sympathetic to the guy, you seem to have a view that if Fox have covered it you have to have the opposite opinion

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/a-liberals-perspective-evergreen-college-and-the_us_5932d7a2e4b062a6ac0ad024

"Huffington Post" is another trash media outlet which really doesn't belong in a forum like A+A.

Am I doing it right?

Stop sharing news!

Atheism & Agnosticism is a place for ideology and obedience, not questioning and investigation.

silverharp · 27-06-2017 10:18am

from RealPeerReview , a la research goals can we at least agree that we hope no tax dollars directly or indirectly paid for this :pac:

https://twitter.com/RealPeerReview/status/879626923466530821

https://twitter.com/RealPeerReview/status/879628023762497536

silverharp · 12-09-2017 1:25pm

Firstly is the Times of Israel ok? its not on the verboten list? :pac:

Anyway colleges must be back, first out of the traps is Berkeley , get the fainting chairs and vapors ready...

https://www.timesofisrael.com/uc-ber...-conservative/

The University of California at Berkeley sent out a letter on Thursday informing students, faculty and staff that counseling services would be made available ahead of a talk at the campus next week by a conservative Jewish commentator.

the school is “deeply concerned about the impact some speakers may have on individuals’ sense of safety and belonging” and therefore “offered and encouraged” faculty and staff to take advantage of the support services offered by the school.
America will go under without anyone having to fire a shot.

seamus · 12-09-2017 2:42pm

Actual release here:
http://news.berkeley.edu/campus-update-on-ben-shapiro-event/

To be fair, it's pretty clear that statement about support services is meant in a general sense to apply to any event at the college and not Shapiro's specifically.

In that Berkeley are apparently trying to facilitate as many differents speakers as possible, which requires making support services available to those who may have trouble with this.

You know, it sounds crazy that someone can't just ignore a speaker and not get upset about these things, but if one student chooses to go cry in the support office rather than go home and get their M16, then it's a win for Berkeley.

robindch · 12-09-2017 3:08pm

silverharp wrote: »

Firstly is the Times of Israel ok? its not on the verboten list? :pac:

There's no verboten list of course, but you will be aware that if you post clearly-biased stories from trash-media websites, then - like recedite with his wonky explanations for Charlottesville, or JC explaining biology from a creationist perspective - nobody's going to take you seriously

PopePalpatine · 12-09-2017 3:34pm

seamus wrote: »

Actual release here:
http://news.berkeley.edu/campus-update-on-ben-shapiro-event/

To be fair, it's pretty clear that statement about support services is meant in a general sense to apply to any event at the college and not Shapiro's specifically.

In that Berkeley are apparently trying to facilitate as many differents speakers as possible, which requires making support services available to those who may have trouble with this.

You know, it sounds crazy that someone can't just ignore a speaker and not get upset about these things, but if one student chooses to go cry in the support office rather than go home and get their M16, then it's a win for Berkeley.

...or their pick-up truck.

silverharp · 12-09-2017 3:58pm

seamus wrote: »

Actual release here:
http://news.berkeley.edu/campus-update-on-ben-shapiro-event/

To be fair, it's pretty clear that statement about support services is meant in a general sense to apply to any event at the college and not Shapiro's specifically.

In that Berkeley are apparently trying to facilitate as many differents speakers as possible, which requires making support services available to those who may have trouble with this.

You know, it sounds crazy that someone can't just ignore a speaker and not get upset about these things, but if one student chooses to go cry in the support office rather than go home and get their M16, then it's a win for Berkeley.

its still depressing, makes it sound like that part of the college is going on lockdown, I doubt such a character will have an "M16"

Fully Baked Left Wing Vegan Cookies

Comments