Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Fine Universities that are denying free speech.

1…34689…31

Comments

  • #152
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 86,725 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    DickSwiveller wrote: »
    Ye, you're right, it's easy to give a talk when some moron is screaming.

    Microphone and speakers not provided?


  • #153
    DickSwiveller
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,697 ✭✭✭DickSwiveller


    Overheal wrote: »
    Microphone and speakers not provided?

    You're definitely on a wind up.


  • #154
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 86,725 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    DickSwiveller wrote: »
    You're definitely on a wind up.

    No seriously. If a speaker wants to come and talk to a University he can get on the mic and talk louder than a few rabble in the back surely?

    If the speaker isn't looking to field questions or handle dissenting views I recommend they just do a telecast instead and ask the custodian to turn the volume up really high.


  • #155
    DickSwiveller
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,697 ✭✭✭DickSwiveller


    Overheal wrote: »
    No seriously. If a speaker wants to come and talk to a University he can get on the mic and talk louder than a few rabble in the back surely?

    If the speaker isn't looking to field questions or handle dissenting views I recommend they just do a telecast instead and ask the custodian to turn the volume up really high.

    I'm sure any speaker would be happy to field questions and handle dissenting views. Screaming during his/her talk is disruptive. See the difference?


  • #156
    Brian?
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 22,685 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    DickSwiveller wrote: »
    Objecting is fine. Trying to shut down a speaker, whether explicitly -Shouting down a speaker and interrupting a talk - or implicitly - requiring speakers to sign forms prior to speaking - is censorship, and should be condemned.

    It is not censorship. It’s objection.

    The students don’t have the power to censor anyone.

    they/them/theirs


    The more you can increase fear of drugs and crime, welfare mothers, immigrants and aliens, the more you control all of the people.

    Noam Chomsky



  • Advertisement
  • #157
    Brian?
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 22,685 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    DickSwiveller wrote: »
    Same thing. There's no difference.

    You genuinely don’t see the difference between protesting what someone is saying and denying their right to say it?

    they/them/theirs


    The more you can increase fear of drugs and crime, welfare mothers, immigrants and aliens, the more you control all of the people.

    Noam Chomsky



  • #158
    ancapailldorcha
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 41,875 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    DickSwiveller wrote: »
    "Right Wing Blowhards"

    You mean you disagree with us. If students interrupt a talk by shouting down the speaker there is no marketplace of ideas - it's a marketplace of one idea, and all others are silenced.

    You support the same thing in the opposite direction though. The only reason students are getting a hard time is down to their tendency to lean left.

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • #159
    DickSwiveller
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,697 ✭✭✭DickSwiveller


    Brian? wrote: »
    It is not censorship. It’s objection.

    The students don’t have the power to censor anyone.

    It's depressing that I even have to explain this. Shouting incessantly during a speech is not "objection". The aim of such shouting is to silence the speaker. People can be censored in lots of different ways. As George Orwell said: "Unpopular ideas can be silenced, and inconvenient facts kept dark, without the need for any official ban".

    Again, it's absolutely astonishing that I have to explain this.


  • #160
    DickSwiveller
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,697 ✭✭✭DickSwiveller


    ancapailldorcha wrote: »
    You support the same thing in the opposite direction though. The only reason students are getting a hard time is down to their tendency to lean left.

    How do I support the same thing in the opposite direction? It's nothing to do with left and right. The posters on boards are obsessed with this dichotomy. I'll defend the right of the most extreme communist to air his/her views uninterrupted.


  • #161
    ancapailldorcha
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 41,875 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    DickSwiveller wrote: »
    I'll defend the right of the most extreme communist to air his/her views uninterrupted.

    The last sentiment is common but rarely meant. You describe protesting as illegitimate because the protestors are of a left wing persuasion whereas the right wing speakers must be treated with silence. That's fairly transparent.

    I don't agree with no platform and shouting down people with different opinions. I'd prefer to hear them. Were Jacob Rees-Mogg to speak at the University which employs me, I'd go and see him and probably try and snag a selfie if I felt gamey enough.

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • Advertisement
  • #162
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 86,725 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    DickSwiveller wrote: »
    I'm sure any speaker would be happy to field questions and handle dissenting views. Screaming during his/her talk is disruptive. See the difference?

    Yes I'm sure they would. Unfortunately for some speakers their notoriety precedes them and they are responsible for their own consequences. Also, it really depends on the nature of the 'screaming' - if we're talking the incoherent droning people do at sporting matches that's one thing, if it's pointed speech to object to a falsehood or an outrageous position, that's another.

    I feel the speaker should reasonably be prepared for intermittent objection from the audiences in proportion to how controversial the subject matter is.


  • #163
    DickSwiveller
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,697 ✭✭✭DickSwiveller


    ancapailldorcha wrote: »
    The last sentiment is common but rarely meant. You describe protesting as illegitimate because the protestors are of a left wing persuasion whereas the right wing speakers must be treated with silence. That's fairly transparent.

    I don't agree with no platform and shouting down people with different opinions. I'd prefer to hear them. Were Jacob Rees-Mogg to speak at the University which employs me, I'd go and see him and probably try and snag a selfie if I felt gamey enough.

    And if a far left person is speaking I think right wing protestors should stay away. I didn't mention left or right. As I say, it's an obsession with some of the posters on here.


  • #164
    Brian?
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 22,685 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    DickSwiveller wrote: »
    It's depressing that I even have to explain this. Shouting incessantly during a speech is not "objection". The aim of such shouting is to silence the speaker. People can be censored in lots of different ways. As George Orwell said: "Unpopular ideas can be silenced, and inconvenient facts kept dark, without the need for any official ban".

    Again, it's absolutely astonishing that I have to explain this.

    People love to quote Orwell. It’s starting to drive me nuts how often his quotes are used to try and prove some argument they simply don’t apply to.

    You know what’s astonishing? You are giving out about censorship and asking for one side to be censored. You want the students censored so the folks they dislike can speak in peace. it’s a ludicrous argument you’re trying to make.

    You either support free speech, be they speaker or shouter, or you don’t. Make up your bloody mind.

    they/them/theirs


    The more you can increase fear of drugs and crime, welfare mothers, immigrants and aliens, the more you control all of the people.

    Noam Chomsky



  • #165
    ancapailldorcha
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 41,875 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    DickSwiveller wrote: »
    And if a far left person is speaking I think right wing protestors should stay away. I didn't mention left or right. As I say, it's an obsession with some of the posters on here.

    This is always what it comes down to though. You didn't have to. Protestors should be free to go where they please. If they too disruptive then that is something for the event organisers to deal with. In this day and age, that should be common knowledge by now.

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • #166
    Brian?
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 22,685 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    DickSwiveller wrote: »
    I'll defend the right of the most extreme communist to air his/her views uninterrupted.

    As long as they’re polite about it? Is that your point? Each side should sit in silence and allow the other to speak uninterrupted? Who enforces the silence?

    I agree that it would be just lovely if this could happen. But who enforces it?

    they/them/theirs


    The more you can increase fear of drugs and crime, welfare mothers, immigrants and aliens, the more you control all of the people.

    Noam Chomsky



  • #167
    DickSwiveller
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,697 ✭✭✭DickSwiveller


    Overheal wrote: »
    Yes I'm sure they would. Unfortunately for some speakers their notoriety precedes them and they are responsible for their own consequences. Also, it really depends on the nature of the 'screaming' - if we're talking the incoherent droning people do at sporting matches that's one thing, if it's pointed speech to object to a falsehood or an outrageous position, that's another.

    I feel the speaker should reasonably be prepared for intermittent objection from the audiences in proportion to how controversial the subject matter is.

    Again, I appeal to Orwell: "Freedom, as Rosa Luxembourg [sic] said, is ‘freedom for the other fellow’." Forget notoriety and all these other buzz words. Challenge a person on their views using fact and logic.

    You know well I'm not talking about intermittent objection.


  • #168
    Brian?
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 22,685 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    DickSwiveller wrote: »
    Again, I appeal to Orwell: "Freedom, as Rosa Luxembourg [sic] said, is ‘freedom for the other fellow’." Forget notoriety and all these other buzz words. Challenge a person on their views using fact and logic.

    You know well I'm not talking about intermittent objection.

    Here’s an Orwell quote that , on the surface, sounds like it applies here:

    And the only regime which, in the long run, will dare to permit freedom of speech is a Socialist regime.

    Except it has nothing to do with the discussion. We can all do it.

    they/them/theirs


    The more you can increase fear of drugs and crime, welfare mothers, immigrants and aliens, the more you control all of the people.

    Noam Chomsky



  • #169
    20Cent
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,940 ✭✭✭20Cent


    DickSwiveller wrote: »
    "Right Wing Blowhards"

    You mean you disagree with us. If students interrupt a talk by shouting down the speaker there is no marketplace of ideas - it's a marketplace of one idea, and all others are silenced.

    Milo Shapiro Katie Hopkins etc troll people then get all offended if anyone pushes back.


  • #170
    DickSwiveller
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,697 ✭✭✭DickSwiveller


    Brian? wrote: »
    People love to quote Orwell. It’s starting to drive me nuts how often his quotes are used to try and prove some argument they simply don’t apply to.

    You know what’s astonishing? You are giving out about censorship and asking for one side to be censored. You want the students censored so the folks they dislike can speak in peace. it’s a ludicrous argument you’re trying to make.

    You either support free speech, be they speaker or shouter, or you don’t. Make up your bloody mind.

    I'm not asking for censorship. You're deliberately twisting what I'm saying. I'm saying they shouldn't go if they are going to disrupt the talk by shouting while the speaker is talking. They can ask questions once he is finished. I'm not calling for these babies to be arrested. But I think it is wrong to try and silence someone by shouting over them.

    Let me give you an example: Ben Shapiro, a conservative commentator, was giving a talk in some American University and a group of protesters walked up to the stage and started screaming "safety" (I know, it's embarrassing). The security didn't do anything and the hundreds of people who turned up to hear him speak had to wait an hour before they left. Do you think this is acceptable?


  • #171
    Brian?
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 22,685 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    DickSwiveller wrote: »
    I'm not asking for censorship. You're deliberately twisting what I'm saying. I'm saying they shouldn't go if they are going to disrupt the talk by shouting while the speaker is talking. They can ask questions once he is finished. I'm not calling for these babies to be arrested. But I think it is wrong to try and silence someone by shouting over them.

    I’m not twisting what you’re saying. You are not asking that the protesters stay at home. You said the Universities should stop them protesting. You are asking the Universities to silence them. That’s the very definition of censorship.
    Let me give you an example: Ben Shapiro, a conservative commentator, was giving a talk in some American University and a group of protesters walked up to the stage and started screaming "safety" (I know, it's embarrassing). The security didn't do anything and the hundreds of people who turned up to hear him speak had to wait an hour before they left. Do you think this is acceptable?

    Define acceptable? I don’t like it. I believe it’s within their rights to do it. And you would also if you actually believed in free speech.

    On a side note. Ben Shapiro is a horrible human being. It upsets me that so many people believe in him

    they/them/theirs


    The more you can increase fear of drugs and crime, welfare mothers, immigrants and aliens, the more you control all of the people.

    Noam Chomsky



  • Advertisement
  • #172
    DickSwiveller
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,697 ✭✭✭DickSwiveller


    Brian? wrote: »
    I’m not twisting what you’re saying. You are not asking that the protesters stay at home. You said the Universities should stop them protesting. You are asking the Universities to silence them. That’s the very definition of censorship.



    Define acceptable? I don’t like it. I believe it’s within their rights to do it. And you would also if you actually believed in free speech.

    On a side note. Ben Shapiro is a horrible human being. It upsets me that so many people believe in him

    They can protest outside the venue if they want. How would it ever be possible to hold talk with your ridiculous philosophy, where anyone can just shout down the speaker.

    "Ben Shapiro is a horrible human being. It upsets me that so many people believe in him"

    You mean you disagree with him. This is the problem with people like you. You see any political opponent as evil. No wonder you support suppressing their views.


  • #173
    Brian?
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 22,685 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    DickSwiveller wrote: »
    They can protest outside the venue if they want. How would it ever be possible to hold talk with your ridiculous philosophy, where anyone can just shout down the speaker.

    So you do want them censored.
    "Ben Shapiro is a horrible human being. It upsets me that so many people believe in him"

    You mean you disagree with him. This is the problem with people like you. You see any political opponent as evil. No wonder you support suppressing their views.

    I don’t support suppressing anyone’s views. As I have said about 20 times now. I wish these protesters would allow people to speak. But I don’t support anyone stopping the protests either. I believe in free speech.

    There are many, many people I disagree with. 99% of these people are decent human beings. Including you, as far as I know.

    Ben Shapiro is in the 1% I consider a horrible human being. It’s a rarefied category.

    they/them/theirs


    The more you can increase fear of drugs and crime, welfare mothers, immigrants and aliens, the more you control all of the people.

    Noam Chomsky



  • #174
    DickSwiveller
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,697 ✭✭✭DickSwiveller


    Brian? wrote: »
    So you do want them censored.



    I don’t support suppressing anyone’s views. As I have said about 20 times now. I wish these protesters would allow people to speak. But I don’t support anyone stopping the protests either. I believe in free speech.

    There are many, many people I disagree with. 99% of these people are decent human beings. Including you, as far as I know.

    Ben Shapiro is in the 1% I consider a horrible human being. It’s a rarefied category.

    Fair enough. I've said all I have to say. It's farewell from me.


  • #175
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 86,725 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    DickSwiveller wrote: »
    You mean you disagree with him. This is the problem with people like you. You see any political opponent as evil. No wonder you support suppressing their views.

    Isn't that exactly what you just did here?!


  • #176
    DickSwiveller
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,697 ✭✭✭DickSwiveller


    Overheal wrote: »
    Isn't that exactly what you just did here?!

    what?


  • #177
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 86,725 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    DickSwiveller wrote: »
    what?

    You see Brian? as an evil political rival who wants to suppress the views of others. Making you one of those people, it would seem.


  • #178
    DickSwiveller
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,697 ✭✭✭DickSwiveller


    Overheal wrote: »
    You see Brian? as an evil political rival who wants to suppress the views of others. Making you one of those people, it would seem.

    I don't follow your logic at all. I'm not sure you though. Slán leat.


  • #179
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 86,725 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    DickSwiveller wrote: »
    I don't follow your logic at all.

    I can't break it down any simpler: you're levying a generalization against a single person, accusing them of seeing others as being evil while, effectively, calling them evil in turn.


  • #180
    DickSwiveller
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,697 ✭✭✭DickSwiveller


    Overheal wrote: »
    I can't break it down any simpler: you're levying a generalization against a single person, accusing them of seeing others as being evil while, effectively, calling them evil in turn.

    How am I effectively calling him evil? This makes no sense. I'm getting bored.


  • Advertisement
  • #181
    20Cent
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,940 ✭✭✭20Cent


    DickSwiveller wrote: »
    "Ben Shapiro is a horrible human being. It upsets me that so many people believe in him"

    You mean you disagree with him. This is the problem with people like you. You see any political opponent as evil. No wonder you support suppressing their views.

    Shapiro isn't a political opponent. He's a shock jock cashing in on hatred.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement