https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net...1d&oe=59420CA8
Printable View
Regardless of this counter-narrative, opposition to Trump is largely taking place legally and non-violently within the public sphere. That's to say nothing of the courts, which would seem to be the very definition of the rule of law.
Make sure you bring your paddle:
https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net...43&oe=590CC84F
I think "you don't get much of a response here" because we've gone round and round on this issue so. many. times. I think most around here are in agreement that this sort of speech-policing is bad, even if the speech being policed is also bad, or coming from bad people. I understand the argument that these students don't want their tuition and student-fees funding people they feel to be evil, but I think forcing universities to cancel speakers' events is both philosophically, pedagogically, and practically misguided.
In the case of the former two, universities should be about exposing students to more, not less, of the universe; and then challenging them to argue cogently for or against those philosophies and policies with which they find an affinity, or which they find deficient. In the case of the latter, protesting these speakers convince few who weren't already convinced, and—especially if the protests turn violent—cedes a sort of moral high-ground to folks who don't deserve or are (like Milo Yiannopoulos) morally bankrupt.