NYT: Trump Says He Will Sign Free Speech Order for College Campuses

Because I was commenting on one particular situation and certain specific students ("these students").

So, in your parlance, it was a "micro claim" about a particular incident.

 

Your last paragraph is odd in the context of "get out the young vote.".

Are you saying their undeveloped brains excuses their decision making ability and judgment. If that is truly your take, how are you comfortable with letting them vote? "They are not responsible for their unformed views". (which, fyi, I don't agree with but your response is not well thought out.)

 

Seems like another executive order that gives the illusion of work being done but is just a publicity stunt that doesn't change constitutional precedent.

It's the equivalent of scattering a bunch of paperwork on your desk to give the illusion of work but none really is. Or a kid that pushes their veggies around their dish to give the illusion that at least half or most vegetables were eaten but in actuality aren't.

Nothing will come from this executive order other than provide a distraction from all the investigations currently going with the Trump administration and a GOP Congress in denial that they support a crook for a President.

 

I would always agree except in this case Trump doesn't care about true free speech. He cares because the the speech he is protecting favors him. When it comes to news media, private organizations, private citizens, etc... if their opinions are opposed to his he will do everything he can to stifle and even worse discredit. On that alone I won't support any subjective executive order. Besides the constitution already protects speech, press, assembly, religion, etc... that way too many people ignore.

 

This is exactly the type of Executive Order that Republicans b****ed about for 8 years with Obama but now are on board with this type of presidential over reach in areas where he'll just complicate issues that are better addressed elsewhere.

If either a college leader, or an individual representing the college violates someone's rights, then that person has the ability to file a lawsuit under our current system of laws.

I would hope THE REPUBLICAN congress would not be hypocritical, and would support a resolution to over turn this Executive Order if it happens. If this is really a problem... SUE the Colleges in question citing where protesters or activists have had their 1st amendment freedoms violated.

 

related to the thread topic. A conference at Emory University this month on the topic of "Academic Freedom and Free Speech on Campus":

Academic Freedom and Free Speech on Campus

Join Emory University for its conference Academic Freedom and Free Speech on Campus March 21-23, 2019 to discuss what academic freedom and free speech mean in the life of higher education institutions today.

The conference is an opportunity to showcase how public and private institutions of higher education continue to be on the forefront of debate, deliberation, and knowledge creation. Emory University is committed to this through its strategic framework, which states that "we practice the values of intellectual rigor, integrity, risk taking, and collaboration. Our faculty and students pursue open inquiry across disciplines—guided by evidence, committed to critical inquiry, fueled by the creative spirit, and dedicated not only to discovery in its own right but to solving problems and serving society." This conference was created to demonstrate this commitment.

The goal of the conference is to generate conversations on ideas, laws, policies, and practices related to academic freedom and free speech on college campuses. It will provide opportunities for faculty, scholars, student affairs professionals and students to interrogate ideas ranging from academic freedom and free speech to safe spaces, and to discuss campus protests and dissent in order to develop practices and policies that promote free speech.

Please join the conversation by attending the conference.​

https://reason.com/volokh/2019/03/04/emory-academic-freedomfree-speech-confer

more info at the link including conference participants

 

It's not student speakers that are the issue. Student speakers are bound by student conduct rules and if they go full white nationalist they're going to be disciplined and/or expelled. It's the non-student bigots who are invited or even not invited at all that target campuses with hate speech. This is complete horseshit. You've obviously not paid much attention to the phenomenon. It's just another line item on the agenda of the white supremacist in office.

 

Just another stupid Republican slogan.

 

I'm not. They shouldn't drive or be on the internet either. Turn them into soldiers and cull out the bottom third for pet food.

 

coverage at Real Clear Politics with reactions from several university presidents:

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/a...speech_follows_wave_of_complaints_139656.html

more at the link

Also, ib4 @NewRoxFan protests with his "biased source" alert™ early alarm system:

 

No, I'm saying that teenage young adults might be overall passionate with their causes and not have the experience to handle dissent.

Their "views" are not the problem. I'm sure their actual views are more thought out than most adults who have never experienced a form of higher education where they had to read dense material daily and write 20 page analytical papers every other week discussing the dense material they read. It's their lack of experience with interacting with dissent than only is solved through growing up and fully developing into adults.


In other words 18-22 year olds are more susceptible to be being baited by Milo type trolls.

 

When I was growing up, I and the folks I went to college with were pretty open minded to a lot of different experiences, viewpoints, etc. This is purely based on my own perception and not scientific obviously, but it sure seems like people are more flexible (tolerant) when younger to different views and tend to get more locked in to a specific viewpoint as they age. This is obviously a gross over generalization, and maybe others have a very different feel for it.

But the idea that younger people need to be protected from "dissenting" views seems so backwards to me. I always viewed youth and particularly college or your late teens/early 20's as the time to be exposed to as many different viewpoints as possible. "Protecting" young adults from dissenting views is essentially trying to make sure those young adults are sheltered from other viewpoints and seems closer to indoctrination than education.

 

I never made a claim about younger people needing being "protected". I'm stating a cause for a type of the behavior.

Also, I hope you can acknowledge that social media has allowed the exaggeration of these claims where onsies and twosies anecdotes are constantly spammed on Twitter and YouTube feeds. What makes it worse is people try to seek out these videos to purposefully be outraged by them which leads to YouTube algorithms just spamming the their suggestions feed with every nook and cranny incident that happened in college campuses across the country. This limelight didn't exist when you went to college.

People use social media anecdotes to spam a narrative. There is no reliance on statistical evidence. Just like how the right wing has created a narrative from these spammed social media accounts that antifa is a systemic threat that has murdered many Americans. Yet when you actually look at data such as when the CATO institute did a study to determine which ideological terror threat generates the most deaths and injuries since 1992, I believe it's 950+ injuries or deaths from right wing extremists to 75 injuries or deaths from left wing extremists. But social media and YouTube click bait would imply the data is nowhere near one sided as it is.

 

I do think that social media is used to create the impression that potentially rare things are more common than they really are. I think that probably applies beyond the "right wing" though.

 

I think it heavily skews right wing.

I have a "foot in the door" amongst right wing culture and college campus culture given my military and school experience. From my experience at least, my right wing friends are more reliant on YouTube alt right personalities and reductive memes while my college friends are more reliant on MSM sources.

 

Even if this were true...isn't that precisely why colleges should strive to include dissenting voices, precisely to expose students to them so that they could learn how to cope with them?

 

Whatever they should strive for, shouldn't they strive for it because it is consistent with the organization's mission and not because Big Brother told them they had to?