We Can’t Promise Not To Hit You

Emily Zanotti spies more campus censorship backed by the threat of thuggery: 

DePaul University’s chapter of Young Americans for Freedom says they will defy an administration ban on “controversial” speakers, and go ahead with an event next week at the Chicago school featuring conservative speaker Ben Shapiro and “Based Mom” Christina Hoff Sommers. Late Friday, YAF issued an open letter to DePaul University’s administration, noting that they could no longer accept DePaul’s argument that Shapiro did not “substantively contribute” to campus discourse, and that “security concerns” warranted keeping him off campus. DePaul’s Vice President of Facilities, Bob Janis, issued the ban in August, telling YAF students that they could not host the author... [because] DePaul’s modest security forces simply could not handle the ensuing chaos.

“Given the experiences and security concerns that some other schools have had with Ben Shapiro speaking on their campuses, DePaul cannot agree to allow him to speak on our campus at this time,” Mr Janis wrote. Since then, however, Shapiro has spoken at several schools, including Yale and UT Austin, without incident — as has Milo Yiannopolous, whose “Dangerous Faggot” tour has criss-crossed several states. YAF argues that it’s DePaul’s students, and not its invited speakers, that create the problem. DePaul’s YAF branch also note that DePaul claims to have doubled down on its commitment to free speech and the open exchange of ideas on campus, creating a “free speech” speaker series that did not feature any conservative speakers. Hosting Shapiro, they contend, would be well in line with that commitment.

So, to recap. The university’s stated rationale for censorship is that it can’t protect either the speakers or their audience from disruption and thuggery by its own students, which is quite an admission, really. And as we’ve seen, the threat of physical intimidation and mob harassment – by these would-be intellectuals of the left – is quite real. What the university doesn’t admit, however, is that this problem won’t be solved by banning any speakers deemed remotely controversial – in this case, two speakers who prefer evidence and debate over threats and hysteria. It seems to me that the problem will only be addressed, or begin to be addressed, when leftist students no longer feel that mob censorship and physical intimidation are things they can get away with, and get away with repeatedly, without facing consequences. Say, being expelled.

Given the rich seam of psychodrama hinted at above, in which victimhood is professed with rumblings of mob intimidation, and “diversity” comes to mean intolerant mental conformity, it’s perhaps worth revisiting this earlier episode at California State University, Los Angeles, where Mr Shapiro was attempting to speak, and noting both the level of student thuggery and the participation of faculty. Specifically, one Dr Robert Weide, an assistant professor of sociology - a grown man who spends his time tearing down flyers for events he doesn’t like, who denounces those who disagree with him as “fascists” and “white supremacists,” and who offers to fight dissenting students in the university gym, boasting, “I lift bro.” Several videos of Dr Weide’s progressive protégés and their, um, physical vigorousness can be found here. 

Those of you unfamiliar with Ben Shapiro’s lectures may enjoy his comments on Dr Weide’s mental contortions, which are interrupted repeatedly by protestors pulling the fire alarm. There’s also a short but effective deconstruction of so-called “white privilege,” and a longer Q&A session filmed at the University of Rochester. And this lively lecture and discussion at Westmont College, which students were banned from recording by university administrators. With the result that Mr Shapiro is obliged to speak with one arm outstretched and holding his own camera, while sharing a number of facts one isn’t supposed to know about.

Christina Hoff Sommers’ notoriously violence-inspiring opinions can of course be viewed here. Oh, and here’s Dr Sommers’ security detail for her talk at the aforementioned California State University, Los Angeles. I’m sure the officers were only there to prevent Dr Sommers from jumping off the stage, glassing someone and feasting on their blood. 

And at risk of banging the same old drum, it may be worth bearing in mind that the Clown Quarter of academia, as seen above, is, in effect, the left’s proving ground and fiefdom, a place where leftist conceits are developed and institutionalised, and where they prevail untroubled by embarrassment and all but unopposed. The Clown Quarter is therefore a taster of the left’s idealised, corrected, more compassionate society. And as such, it tells us quite a lot about who its proponents are, and who they would be, given more power.

Update:

Thirty burly chaps, one short Jewish guy and the miracle of Skype. 

Comments

[Anna]

I’m sure the officers were only there to prevent Dr Sommers from jumping off the stage, glassing someone and feasting on their blood.

In the mirror universe Dr Sommers has tattoos and carries a flick knife.

[sk60]

So, to recap. The university’s stated rationale for censorship is that it can’t protect either the speakers or their audience from disruption and thuggery by its own students, which is quite an admission, really.

They can, they just don't want to.

[John D]

YAF argues that it’s DePaul’s students, and not its invited speakers, that create the problem.

That. They're keeping the wrong people off campus.

[billdehaan]

They're keeping the wrong people off campus.

Worse. They're letting in the wrong people as students on the campus.

[David]

They can, they just don’t want to.

Yes, probably. But I also wonder if there’s an element of actual fear. Certainly, there’s plenty of cowardice.

[Kevin]

The world will be able to tell if Trump is serious by his treatment of education. The money needs to be cut off. The research grants, cutoff. The loan guarantees, cutoff. Harvard is wellspring of the swamp; it needs to be treated accordingly.

[R. Sherman]

Given that DePaul has confessed both an inability and unwillingness to protect a portion of its student body from physical harm, perhaps the YAF could crowd source its own security. The Patriot Guard perhaps?

[Jeff Guinn]

Say, being expelled.

Obviously -- certainly DePaul has policies about free speech, right?

[a minute or so of Google-fu, and, by golly, there is.]

DePaul’s mission is built upon the Vincentian ideal of universal dignity in which each person is invaluable and worthy of respect as a member of the human family. That dignity depends in no small measure upon each individual’s freedom and opportunity as a speaker to give voice to his or her beliefs, and upon each individual’s freedom and opportunity as a listener to choose whether and how to respond. We believe that human interaction should always be conducted with civility and mutual respect. We believe that views and beliefs can be tested – should be tested – as part of the intellectual mission that we serve, but always in furtherance of the goals of education, intellectual enrichment, and preparation for citizenship

Following that is some edu-speak pablum (there must be an entire year devoted to teaching writing jargon-laden damp flannel prose):

Members of our community have rights and responsibilities. DePaul affirms the right of speakers to voice their viewpoints, even at the risk of controversy. DePaul also insists that all speakers remember that the right of expression carries with it the equally important responsibility to exercise that right with a conscientious respect for human dignity. We accept that there is a distinction between being provocative and being hurtful. Speech whose primary purpose is to wound is inconsistent with our Vincentian and Catholic values. The university community must meet these situations by reasserting our fundamental values and by fostering educational opportunities, where appropriate.

Having watched Milo, Shapiro, and Sommers, they can't possibly be guilty of not getting the distinction between provocative and hurtful. (And if there is any doubt on the matter, DePaul needs to be specific.)

If, and this is a big, huge, looming IF, DePaul isn't Maoist to the core, then they have no choice but to allow the presentation to go ahead, and, again with that big IF, advise any students that if they impede access to the venue, disrupt the presentation, or assault or batter attendees or speakers, they will be expelled without recourse.

Fat chance.

Which will give, as Kevin suggested, Trump a golden opportunity to shore up his base.

[Sporkatus]

Just so we're clear, the functional process here is to take the schoolyard game of "stop hitting yourself" and use it as the basis of an exotic new Blame Ethics, right?

[David]

Just so we’re clear, the functional process here is to take the schoolyard game of “stop hitting yourself” and use it as the basis of an exotic new Blame Ethics, right?

Pretty much. Though to convey some flavour of the sinister dynamic, you need something more like this: “Don’t make me hurt you, baby. You know I hate hurting you.”

[Sporkatus]

Sinister, yes, but even the meanest drunk can probably articulate his Fake Reasons for abuse better than these daffy children.

[Farnsworth M Muldoon]

How the campus garbage babies came to be: rampant Trumphausen By Proxy from the two standard deviations to the left product of schools granting degrees in "education".

[Hopp Singg]

I see a biz opportunity for an independent evaluator of education, one on whom normal people and biz's could rely when assessing candidates. It could include campus political activities in the profiles, for those who wish to make a special effort to hire SJWs.

[sH2]

“Don’t make me hurt you, baby. You know I hate hurting you.”

https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/797869339621801985

"Consider this a warning"

[David]

“Consider this a warning”

Or, “Do as we say and no-one gets hurt. Apart from the people we’re going to hurt while you’re not filming us, obviously.”

I believe the term is vermin.

[champ]

"Yes, probably. But I also wonder if there’s an element of actual fear. Certainly, there’s plenty of cowardice."

I think that fools such as Weide somehow picture themselves as radical heroes to the ignorant student population they purport to "teach."

[Joan]

O/T. Is Lena Dunham actually insane?

https://twitter.com/mtracey/status/798164155693928449

[David]

Is Lena Dunham actually insane?

Irreparably damaged, certainly. There’s just no way a mind like that is ever going to work properly.

[PiperPaul]

"fools such as Weide somehow picture themselves as radical heroes"

Read Hoffer's 'The True Believer'.

[Spiny Norman]

Is Lena Dunham actually insane?

Irreparably damaged, certainly.

While reading her self-absorbed whimper, this caught my eye:

My voice was literally lost when I woke up, squeaky and raw, and I ached in the places that make me a woman, the places where I've been grabbed so carelessly,

Maybe she should ask her sister about that.

[Rafi]

There’s just no way a mind like that is ever going to work properly.

Have I topped Lena with this one?

https://twitter.com/fred_connection/status/798186377523253248

[david morris]

Wonder just how many snowflakes would wimper if they read this :

https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2016/11/14/the-opposite-of-hoverhand/

[The original Mr. X]

Just so we’re clear, the functional process here is to take the schoolyard game of “stop hitting yourself” and use it as the basis of an exotic new Blame Ethics, right?

Pretty much. Though to convey some flavour of the sinister dynamic, you need something more like this: “Don’t make me hurt you, baby. You know I hate hurting you.”

Personally, I always find this thing reminds me pretty strongly of the Mafia paying a visit to a local business-owner. "Looks like you've got a nice debate lined up here. It would be a shame if someone were to... disrupt it."

[Sporkatus]

Except that the mafioso knows his "protection" agreement will only hold as long as he actually, y'know, doesn't set fire to the paratroopers if the payments are made. Usually.

Lefties, on the other hand, are more Darth Vader than Dinsdale Pirahna, viz altering the deal, making things worse all the time, etc. etc.

[Spiny Norman]

More Darth Vader than... who?

;-)

[Sporkatus]

Well, I should have said Luigi Vercotti for the burning paratroopers bit, but Dinsdale dragged the reference into the right neighborhood and is just a funnier name to say. As you giant hallucinatory hedgehogs are aware.

[David]

But don’t call them snowflakes.

And here’s post-election “hate crime” hoax #3,022.

[David]

Have I topped Lena with this one?

Help yourself to cake. Unless of course someone else wants to pick up that gauntlet.

[Dildo Schwaggins]

My voice was literally lost when I woke up, squeaky and raw, and I ached in the places that make me a woman...

That's not the election, that's gonorrhea.

[David]

And speaking of snowflakes: “People just think we’re being overdramatic.”

[Jonathan]

O/T. Is Lena Dunham actually insane?

Michael Tracey has been outstanding on twitter - even though he's a lefty.

[Ted S., Catskill Mtns., NY, USA]

Campus Reform is trying to list the "Latest 3325 Articles"? What a memory hog.

[Ted S., Catskill Mtns., NY, USA]

Ack! It looks like I forgot to close the italics tag! Off to the Correction Booth for me, I suppose.

[Jonathan]

Hate Crime hoax #3,023 ( actually earlier this year, but you catch my drift)

[Jonathan]

#3,024

[Tim Newman]

More condescending rubbish from American feminists:

That is exactly where I’m starting. I live in a Muslim neighborhood and it’s making me sick thinking about how terrified everyone must be. I’m going to talk to a Muslim coworker today about who to approach and how, and exactly what I can do.

Could this be any more condescending?

[WTP]

Have any of y'all picked up on this cognitive dissonance and such going on on LinkedIn? By people in very senior positions, no less. Some in HR as well. Nothing I didn't already know/suspect but with it now out in the open it explains much about how messed up some corporations are. Especially in the so-called diversity department.

[Tim Newman]

Have any of y'all picked up on this cognitive dissonance and such going on on LinkedIn?

No, but I'm going to go and look now. LinkedIn has become a rich depository for essays of dim middle-managers and CEOs on how the world should be run. For most it's obviously the first time they've ever put their ideas in writing and put them to test in the public sphere.

[Farnsworth M Muldoon]

Especially in the so-called diversity department.

That is where it starts. One has to remember that their existence is dependent upon their finding (read fomenting) "diversity" issues.

[David]

“Don’t make me hurt you, baby. You know I hate hurting you.”

[[+]]

and the ony motivation I have is to spite you

Like he's ever needed an excuse.

#TrueColours

[jabrwok]

re:Chu. There are entire continents with almost no white people. Is he chained to a radiator somewhere such that he can't up and leave? If it's a money issue, a simple GoFundMe campaign would likely raise the necessary funds (probably from white people) to facilitate is evacuation.