nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Fine Universities that are denying free speech.

Mutant z

The time has come to uphold democracy and freedom of speech at Universities who are refusing platforms to opposing views. A safe space SJW environment has been created at university campuses where only those with opinions that are pro open borders, pro islam, pro EU, pro feminism, gender neutral, anti Trump, anti Brexit are permitted. Hopefully the recent announcement from the UK about fining universities for deny platforms is enforced because this pathetic SJW childish behaviour has been allowed to continue for far too long. College debating societies are supposed to be places where robust debate of all views and ideas are had not just those that comform to a certain world view, so any university not living up to democratic ideas should be fined and have all funding cut until they uphold the principles of freedom of speech and expression which is a cornerstone in any free democratic society.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Lux23

Are you currently in University?

Jcarroll07

Mutant z wrote: »

The time has come to uphold democracy and freedom of speech at Universities who are refusing platforms to opposing views. A safe space SJW environment has been created at university campuses where only those with opinions that are pro open borders, pro islam, pro EU, pro feminism, gender neutral, anti Trump, anti Brexit are permitted. Hopefully the recent announcement from the UK about fining universities for deny platforms is enforced because this pathetic SJW childish behaviour has been allowed to continue for far too long. College debating societies are supposed to be places where robust debate of all views and ideas are had not just those that comform to a certain world view, so any university not living up to democratic ideas should be fined and have all funding cut until they uphold the principles of freedom of speech and expression which is a cornerstone in any free democratic society.

Dont think the no platforming or anti free speech is really a thing in Ireland when compared to the UK or US. E.g Last year Trinity had that episode with students blocking the israeli ambassador and they got no support from the administration if fact they were pretty much told put up or get out. Most of the opposition is from students themselves and they are few enough in number and often ridiculed for it by fellow students which is heartening to see. Most recent example I have seen is with Nigel Farage's visit tomorrow to trinity. The university is it seems doing every thing it can to accommodate him while its just a few nobody students with nothing better to do that are actually trying to shut it down or advocate that he be no platformed/censored. Not a huge issue in Ireland IMO.

FreudianSlippers

Mutant z wrote: »

The time has come to uphold democracy and freedom of speech at Universities who are refusing platforms to opposing views. A safe space SJW environment has been created at university campuses where only those with opinions that are pro open borders, pro islam, pro EU, pro feminism, gender neutral, anti Trump, anti Brexit are permitted.

For example...

Hopefully the recent announcement from the UK about fining universities for deny platforms is enforced because this pathetic SJW childish behaviour has been allowed to continue for far too long.

Free speech is not absolute; if the UK wants to fine public universities for denying certain platforms, I'd argue there is a slippery-slope there to open up to anti-Islam, anti-Black, pro-Nazi, etc. groups which would argue that they have a "right" to hate-speech.

College debating societies are supposed to be places where robust debate of all views and ideas are had not just those that comform to a certain world view

I have to take it that you've not been in college or other debating societies or competitions. I was never a fan of them myself, but in my education as a lawyer both undergraduate, post-graduate and King's Inns it's not escapable; I'd suggest that your rosy view of them as a place where valid views are debated against fringe, conspiracy or racist/xenophobic viewpoints is off piste at best.

so any university not living up to democratic ideas should be fined and have all funding cut until they uphold the principles of freedom of speech and expression which is a cornerstone in any free democratic society.

This is just pure nonsense tbh.

Jcarroll07

[QUOTE=FreudianSlippers;106029353

This is just pure nonsense tbh.[/QUOTE]

That last bit is actually the more realistic statement. Fact is the UK and the US in the form of state legislators have already implemented or are beginning to implement such laws.

I think your slippery slow argument is backwards in that once you ban certain groups its only a matter of time until other who simply hold a different view point are banned under the same argument. Ben Shapiro in the US is a perfect example he a conservative orthodox jew and was the number one recipient of anti Semitic hate online in 2016 according to the Anti defamation League yet he is called a Nazi in order to prevent him speaking at certain universities. People are no platformed because they may be supportive of the state of Israel the idea that it only applies to racists and bigots ect has been proven to be false time and time again.

There is no "slipper slope" of free speech only the other way around. In fact the "soldiery slope" of free speech sounds incredibly Orwellian. But getting back to my previous point this regressive behaviour thankfully is not really an issue in Ireland.

FreudianSlippers

Ugh. The absolute freedom of speech brigade are out again - there. is. no. such. thing.

Jcarroll07

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Ugh. The absolute freedom of speech brigade are out again - there. is. no. such. thing.

Well it depends, America is has the most "puritan" or progressive laws in regards to speech thats just an objective fact and there are very limited restriction. When it comes to Europe then yes we have various degrees of restriction that are regrettable and hard to defend so your right. The idea exists but the practical implementation is no really there unfortunately.

But I would take serious issue with those that spend most of their time advocating restriction, rather then more liberal progressive laws like the have in the US. It a proven historical fact, free speech is good, censorship is bad, if you dont know that read a history book. In many ways criminalising speech is not far of the idea of a thought crime. What is speech a verbalisation of ones thoughts and opinions if you think criminalisation of that is good or acceptable, to put it simply your a regressive. Its also totally unenforceable how can you police private conversations without implementing a world akin to Orwell's 1984 or North Korea to give it a modern example of the logical conclusion.

granturismo

Mutant z wrote: »

The time has come to uphold democracy and freedom of speech at Universities who are refusing platforms to opposing views.

Please give an example from an Irish University.

Mutant z wrote: »

A safe space SJW environment has been created at university campuses where only those with opinions that are pro open borders, pro islam, pro EU, pro feminism, gender neutral, anti Trump, anti Brexit are permitted.

Please give an example from an Irish University of a 'safe place' created by and sanctioned by an Irish University.

donaghs

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

For example...

Free speech is not absolute; if the UK wants to fine public universities for denying certain platforms, I'd argue there is a slippery-slope there to open up to anti-Islam, anti-Black, pro-Nazi, etc. groups which would argue that they have a "right" to hate-speech.

If you wish to criticize the ideas of religion, or even one specific religion, that automatically equals hate speech?

Mutant z

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Ugh. The absolute freedom of speech brigade are out again - there. is. no. such. thing.

Well you have made your stance perfectly clear.

Mutant z

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

For example...

Free speech is not absolute; if the UK wants to fine public universities for denying certain platforms, I'd argue there is a slippery-slope there to open up to anti-Islam, anti-Black, pro-Nazi, etc. groups which would argue that they have a "right" to hate-speech.

I have to take it that you've not been in college or other debating societies or competitions. I was never a fan of them myself, but in my education as a lawyer both undergraduate, post-graduate and King's Inns it's not escapable; I'd suggest that your rosy view of them as a place where valid views are debated against fringe, conspiracy or racist/xenophobic viewpoints is off piste at best.

This is just pure nonsense tbh.

The you dont agree with me you're a bigot variety this is exactly what im talking about only views that concur with your own the fact is college campuses have become a cesspit for leftist opinions and those who counter that get protested against such as Ben Shapiro who exposes those sjws for the intolerant twats they are, why are those with non left wing views being verbally attacked and assaulted by those idiots why are only those with open border pro feminist pro islamic views being allowed to speak isnt debate supposed to be about representing all political views not just those that represent your own world view.

Widdershins

Sometimes I think Irish people see all this as American issues. It's rife in the UK and creeping in here so it's at least worth a discussion.

Franz Von Peppercorn

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

For example...

Free speech is not absolute; if the UK wants to fine public universities for denying certain platforms, I'd argue there is a slippery-slope there to open up to anti-Islam, anti-Black, pro-Nazi, etc. groups which would argue that they have a "right" to hate-speech.

I have to take it that you've not been in college or other debating societies or competitions. I was never a fan of them myself, but in my education as a lawyer both undergraduate, post-graduate and King's Inns it's not escapable; I'd suggest that your rosy view of them as a place where valid views are debated against fringe, conspiracy or racist/xenophobic viewpoints is off piste at best.

This is just pure nonsense tbh.

The trite phrase “free speech is not absolute” could ban anything you disagree with. Political speech which isn’t incitement should be absolutely protected.

Franz Von Peppercorn

donaghs wrote: »

If you wish to criticize the ideas of religion, or even one specific religion, that automatically equals hate speech?

Extremely scary stuff

Mutant z

Also the attempt to block the Israeli ambassador whatever your views on Israel he should have a right to air his opinions like everyone else would they have done the same with the Turkish or Pakistani ambassador or indeed the ambassadors of any muslim majority country which arnt known for their strong human rights records not to mention the praise they have for Cuba and Venezuela which certainly aren't beacons of human rights. Dont forget how our own president greatly embarrassed this country with his praise of a mass murdering tyrant like Castro and his support for Venezuela where innocent protesters have been shot on the streets this is the type of ultra leftist mindset which is inflicting universities.

sameoldname

Widdershins wrote: »

Sometimes I think Irish people see all this as American issues. It's rife in the UK and creeping in here so it's at least worth a discussion.

Are there any notable cases of opposing opinions being denied a platform in Irish universities? Not being contrarian, just genuinely don't know.

Mutant z

And who cares if someone criticise islam its a disgusting ideology which has slaughtered and enslaved much of the world why wouldnt any sane person criticise it it has offered nothing but human misery to the world and its those who condemn it who are the problem according to the sjws.

fritzelly

Isn't it always the case that the few outliers shout the loudest about freedom of speech - fact is no one wants to listen to them and they don't get it

Franz Von Peppercorn

fritzelly wrote: »

Isn't it always the case that the few outliers shout the loudest about freedom of speech - fact is no one wants to listen to them and they don't get it

If it’s only a few outliers who support freedom of speech then we are all doomed.

fritzelly

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

If it’s only a few outliers who support freedom of speech then we are all doomed.

It's those few outliers spouting crap that the rest of the world doesn't want to hear nor interested in

Franz Von Peppercorn

fritzelly wrote: »

It's those few outliers spouting crap that the rest of the world doesn't want to hear nor interested in

Er, who decides what the rest of the world wants to hear or not? You?

Protecting free speech has to be about minority speech.

Not that the speech is necessarily minority either. Protestors protests every speech made by farage. And yet Brexit happened.

fash

sameoldname wrote: »

Widdershins wrote: »

Sometimes I think Irish people see all this as American issues. It's rife in the UK and creeping in here so it's at least worth a discussion.

Are there any notable cases of opposing opinions being denied a platform in Irish universities? Not being contrarian, just genuinely don't know.

Borderline trinity case here: https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/activist-pulls-out-of-trinity-college-talk-due-to-restrictions-aimed-at-not-antagonising-muslims-31087977.html
Not sure if she got to speak in the end given the publicity though.

sameoldname

fash wrote: »

Borderline trinity case here: https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/activist-pulls-out-of-trinity-college-talk-due-to-restrictions-aimed-at-not-antagonising-muslims-31087977.html
Not sure if she got to speak in the end given the publicity though.

Looks like she got to speak at the Trinity Philosophical Society a few months later.

That would somewhat confirm my feelings on this subject, that various people have flirted with this kind of no platforming thing in Ireland but in general it's not really a tactic that's used very successfully here.

Not that vigilance is not required of course.

Overheal

Mutant z wrote: »

And who cares if someone criticise islam its a disgusting ideology which has slaughtered and enslaved much of the world why wouldnt any sane person criticise it it has offered nothing but human misery to the world and its those who condemn it who are the problem according to the sjws.

There it is

0byme75341jo28

When have you last been in university OP? Speaking as a current student I am almost certain this isn't happening in Ireland.

boombang

Farage spoke at TCD yesterday. On Thursday evening I noticed posters around the college calling for a protest at his address. I was passing the speaking venue sometime before he arrived, but I didn't see any of the protesters at that point.

I was curious to see who would turn out to protest Farage's address. I know this isn't college-endorsed protest, but it does indicate that the narrow-minded instinct to censor exists within the student body.

ancapailldorcha

Mutant z wrote: »

And who cares if someone criticise islam its a disgusting ideology which has slaughtered and enslaved much of the world why wouldnt any sane person criticise it it has offered nothing but human misery to the world and its those who condemn it who are the problem according to the sjws.

And with that, I think we're done here.

ancapailldorcha

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

And with that, I think we're done here.

Mod: I am re-opening this. Please ensure posts are constructive.

Manach

What is now worrying is the move to deny speakers a platform and use violence to enforce this. From the US campases (in the case of speakers like Ben Shapiro) it looks to started up in the UK, as per (link), scuffles that broke out against a conservative speaker. While University admins might be neutral in this ongoing kulturkampf, the extra costs for security and insurance would have a chilling effect on who gets invited to speak.

Overheal

Said expressed views are often why these exact conversations are often quick to be shutdown as done above - frankly rightly so in a lot of cases. As others have pointed out, Universities aren't a carte blanche to have an unrestricted platform to soapbox whatever inane opinion you may have - it has to be based on reason, rationale, critical thinking, research, facts, etc. - similarly the reason you won't see much debate on whether blacks are inferior to whites (anymore) is because the science has been in on that for quite some time, and it's simply untrue; for such a topic it is simply better of the person with those views to refer to the established knowledge-base - trying to instigate debate on a wholly flawed or already disproven premise is not a productive means to learn differently for either party.

By holding the view for example, "islam [is] a disgusting ideology [...] it has offered nothing but human misery to the world," you're basing your discussion of a plainly flawed premise - as it can be shown in at least several cases (if not the majority of cases) that the religion has done some good for those that place their faith in it (for an example, let's hold up Mohammad Ali). By making claims like, "[Islam] has slaughtered and enslaved much of the world," you're lying by omission. You're ignoring the fact that other nationalities (Nation of Islam) and religions have spread slaughter and enslavement around the world - see 19th Century America, the Roman Empire, the British Empire, the Mongolian Empire, The Crusades, and many other examples.

The reason the door of discussion is usually shut on someone when they make claims like, "islam [is] a disgusting ideology which has slaughtered and enslaved much of the world why wouldnt any sane person criticise it it has offered nothing but human misery to the world and its those who condemn it who are the problem according to the sjws," should be patently obvious. It's a premise base on logical fallacy, omission, falsehood, emotions, political biases and feelings, and doesn't exhibit a statement made by someone who has researched the conversation enough to have it in good faith. It is an understandable measure by colleges and other forums to squelch those vapid debates before they start - it is a mess to try and have a conversation based on those premises that are so fundamentally flawed on their face, that it is a waste of academic energy to deconstruct directly. Rather, I would encourage you to go back and study the statement you've made to see if it actually holds truth, before you try and raise it for a higher level discussion as those seen in academia. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. It serves everyone better if we use the same set of facts: you are entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.

Overheal

Manach wrote: »

What is now worrying is the move to deny speakers a platform and use violence to enforce this. From the US campases (in the case of speakers like Ben Shapiro) it looks to started up in the UK, as per (link), scuffles that broke out against a conservative speaker. While University admins might be neutral in this ongoing kulturkampf, the extra costs for security and insurance would have a chilling effect on who gets invited to speak.

Shapiro has exercised his free speech quite a bit - the freedom of speech isn't a blanket protection against the people he pisses off through homophobia and intellectual-bashing though. Again there, you have the problem with a viewpoint that is not based on rationality, robust facts, or critical thinking nearly as much as it is about feelings and emotions and cherry picked information and biases - so it is very difficult to respond to such by using said tools of rationality. Hate for the sake of hate will often be met in kind.