http://www.newsweek.com/how-did-liberalism-campus-turn-intolerance-and-censorship-397536 I posted a thread a while back titled "Why have liberals became such haters?". Of course it was deleted. Now the media is picking up on the liberals hypocrisy and intolerance. I have been correct all along. We are witnessing the high tide of liberalism and the tipping point where liberalism will decline....big time. These college campuses reflect the level at which liberals are out of touch with the majority of people. BLM is not a grass roots movement. It is a creation of liberal elitists. When the people are not behind such a movement it will fail. When a movement is based on lies it will be rejected. BLM is just an example of the liberals sequence of bad moves that will cause it to be rejected by the American people. Are people just waiting for obama to be out of office to reject liberalism? It looks like it.
Leftists are at their core authoritarians. Even in the academy, they have always been totalitarian against other ideas. It just so happens that these professors have made several generations of irrational, intolerant little monsters who are unable to cope with reality. And now they are showing their true colors. Particularly delicious to me is how scared professors are of these automatons now, and how this issue has pitted two of the pillars of leftism-the media and the academy-against each other.
"Their highest calling is self-flagellation. They are required to condemn their own “privilege” and denounce the accomplishments of themselves and their families as unearned and unjust. They are to apologize for their identity group at every opportunity. Those who try to think for themselves are denounced for their heresy as traitors to the cause of collective liberation. Those who insist on following any kind of moral principle or precept—which will necessarily offend some people—are deemed intolerant and demonized." This pretty much mirrors the brainwashing of the populations in Viet Nam and Cambodia when the Communists took over there.
What conservatives need to understand is that this has always been the Marxist left. When they believe they are in a position of power to shut down dissent, that's what they do. In the past they wore the image of the "peaceful hippy" because it allowed them to get a foothold in mainstream Western culture. They were too weak to rule with an iron fist then. Now, with the demographic shift towards the Hispanic world occurring in this country, they do not see themselves losing power for a long long time, so they can be as ruthless as they want. It's similar to how Muslims operate in areas where they are outnumbered. But the important take away is that this is who they are, and who they've always been, since the days of the Bolshevik revolution. They never changed, they just wore different masks for a while.
It never existed. They only "tolerate" things they already agree with, or things that help their agenda succeed. The tolerance they preach is aimed at non-liberals who do not accept their xenophilia.
Here's more: http://thefederalist.com/2016/06/24/campus-conservatives-you-are-not-alone/ Campus Conservatives, You Are Not Alone Conservatives are a minority group on campus, and new networks are arising to support them. Melissa Langsam Braunstein By Melissa Langsam Braunstein JUNE 24, 2016 When I graduated from Harvard’s Kennedy School in 2009, I launched a parting shot at faculty and administrators in our student newspaper. After two years of them making me feel largely unwelcome on campus because of my conservatism, I called out the school for prizing all diversity save intellectual diversity and its insistence on teaching complex policy issues exclusively from the Left. Republicans, especially conservatives, were regularly mocked in class. There was no real attempt to understand who we were or what we believed. Rather, we were typically presented as caricatures and our arguments as stupid or malevolent. There was no sense of goodwill and definitely no presumption of qualitative thinking. As I wrote in 2009: I often find myself in classes hearing my political party and its members caricatured. Last year, a professor informed one of my classes that Mike Huckabee would be my party’s nominee, because we all take marching orders from the Christian Right. I’m not sure he knew there was a Republican primary voter in the room, that I’m a practicing Jew, or that my brain likes exercise. But that professor, like many others I had, was never one to let facts stand in the way of a good stereotype. I thought of all this while covering the Network of Enlightened Women’s (NeW) 2016 national conference. The group for conservative women has chapters on college campuses nationwide and for young professionals in New York and Washington DC. Rather like Empowered Women, another newish group aimed at conservative 20- and 30-something women, NeW aims to reclaim and redefine feminism, shifting the focus from victimhood to empowerment. Established as a book club, NeW’s goal is to bring conservative ideas to women who crave them, train these women to speak confidently about their beliefs on campus, and provide a network for conservative women who may feel isolated and alone on their own campuses. One of the conference’s biggest messages: You are not alone. That was powerful. There was a sense of relief among many women that they could speak freely. They were among others who understood, others who were curious to learn the missing conservative half of their campus syllabi, and others who believed in free speech and debate. There was also a sense of camaraderie, as I spoke to participants. I know from my own experience just how valuable that camaraderie can be. The Pressures of Being In the Out Group In many ways, it was difficult to be in Cambridge at the end of the Bush era, especially as a Bush administration alumna. Progressives were angry and bitter, and everything felt politicized. It may be that I was simply experiencing a shift campuses everywhere were undergoing, but it was notably different from my undergraduate experience several years earlier on the very same campus. When I initially arrived at Harvard in the fall of 1996, it wasn’t cool to be conservative. Becoming one of the campus’ best-known conservatives—not that there was much active competition—wasn’t easy, either. I definitely took guff, like when my Hebrew discussion group laughed that first semester after I admitted I supported Bob Dole, or when I wrote anything violating liberal orthodoxy in The Crimson, our school newspaper. But what I experienced feels quaint by comparison to what I heard from some of these women. One woman told me she thinks she’s had two conservative professors during her three years as a political science major. She presumes this because they’re the only two professors who have kept their political opinions to themselves. By contrast, when I was in college, what Harvard lacked in numbers, conservative government professor Harvey Mansfield made up for in his seeming ubiquity. The soft-spoken Mansfield was outspoken about issues that concerned him. He also became a mentor, leaving much-appreciated voice messages when he thought I had done a stand-out job taking the fight to campus liberals in The Crimson that day. I met no woman who mentioned having any such faculty encouragement. So while I still remember a liberal feminist informing me at a Crimson editorial meeting that my conservative views negated my womanhood, her vitriol wasn’t universal. My classmates didn’t typically insult me for being conservative in class—where I mostly avoided politics by majoring in Hebrew literature—or around campus, where my I wore my politics on my backpack. I had liberal classmates who enjoyed asking my opinions and engaging me in debates. Those debates don’t seem to happen anymore. Every student I spoke to save one said she identified as conservative; the last considered herself “open-minded” and curious about conservatism. Every student, from schools in North Carolina to Florida to Arizona, talked about her keen awareness that she was part of a minority on her campus. We’re Open to Conservatism But We Hate the GOP Some women saw their fellow students as not particularly ideological or curious about current events, simply parroting various liberal pieties when required as a way to get along. One student told me she feels students on her Florida campus “lean conservative, but they don’t realize it, because they think the GOP is a bunch of WASPY old men”—in other words, people who are nothing like them. Panelist Alex Smith of the College Republican National Committee supported this observation. Smith shared that millennials support conservative principles when they are generically branded; millennials just don’t support the GOP. That general campus aversion clearly propelled some of the attendees to join NeW and attend this conference. Women mentioned feeling judged, being accused of sexism because they express conservative views, and being treated as “less credible.” Perhaps most depressingly, a student at a private Christian college admitted she feels uncomfortable sharing her opinions, which are rooted in her Christian values, on her campus. Students from a number of schools talked about feeling that their opinions were not welcome in class discussions. More than one reported having professors interrupt conservative commenters, or having been shouted down or verbally attacked by other students in class. Is this supposed to foster an environment that promotes learning? Perhaps this simply underscores a point made by panelist Sterling Beard of Campus Reform, who noted, “Schools don’t teach students how to think anymore. Instead, they teach them what to think.” That’s a problem. The continued existence of our free society depends on having adults who are capable of asking questions and reasoning critically for themselves. Educated adults need exposure to opposing points of view, both as a way to understand other people and as a way to sharpen their own thinking. As someone who spent six years surrounded by liberal ideas I didn’t subscribe to, I can attest that the experience didn’t hurt me. In fact, I believe it helped improve my reasoning and my ability to argue my beliefs with conviction. It’s scandalous that today’s college students, especially progressive students, are unlikely to ever have such an experience. On the other hand, the fact that there are young women willing to ask questions and seek out different answers is noteworthy—and encouraging. The women of NeW deserve to be lauded for their courage. At an age when most young people simply want to fit in, these women are willing to stand up and stand out.
i'm just waiting for obama to be out of office period. what a wasted presidency, his slogan instead of hope and change, should have been make iran and cuba great again. what ever happened to "question authority". and now bill ayers the domestic terrorist murderer collects a government pension. what's up America.
It didn't help that right wingers stopped being liberal art educated. Plenty of diversity in Business and wall street degrees. Liberals telling the uncouth to shut it, is directly parallel to hatred as sport from cons.
the problem lies in the indoctrination of the writer of this piece. You see conservative Christians are raised with ideas that don't square with reality. It doesn't matter how much one believes anything. If it can't be demonstrated in an empirical manner then it means nothing. Getting mad at those who try to set one straight doesn't solve anything - just makes the complainer look the worse for it.
Here's more: http://insider.foxnews.com/2016/12/19/campus-reform-college-students-sign-petition-ban-christmas OUTRAGEOUS WATCH: College Students Sign Petition to Ban Christmas on Campus share this email Dec 19, 2016 // 8:51am This holiday season, we've already seen atheists, elementary schools and college professors say "Bah humbug!" to the Christmas spirit. But what about college students? Campus Reform reporters Amber Athey and Cabot Phillips visited the University of Virginia to see if students felt "oppressed" and "triggered" by Christmas. Claiming to be members of the fake group "Students for an Inclusive Holiday Season," Athey and Phillips spoke to multiple students who agreed that the university should get rid of any school references to the Christmas holiday. In less than two hours, nearly twenty students opted to sign the fake Christmas-banning petition. Watch the Campus Reform video above, and let us know what you think in the comments.
Here's more: http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-gillman-campus-white-supremacy-20161220-story.html Op-Ed Bigots at the gate: Universities shouldnt duck the fight against white nationalism Demonstrators at Texas A&M University Demonstrators hold signs and chant outside the venue where Richard Spencer, who leads a movement that mixes racism, white nationalism and populism, is scheduled to speak at Texas A&M University in College Station, Texas on Dec. 6. (David J. Phillip / Associated Press) Howard Gillman Across the nation we are witnessing a rise in white nationalism: At a gathering in a Washington, D.C., hotel, audience members gave a Nazi salute; swastikas are popping up on public buildings; cyber hate and cyberbullying are surging. The F.B.I. reports a 6% increase in hate crimes in 2016 over the previous year, fueled by attacks on Muslims. The Southern Poverty Law Center reported nearly 900 accounts of harassment in the 10 days after the presidential election. And this activity is coming to our college campuses. The white supremacist Richard Spencer traveled to Texas A&M to make the case that, At the end of the day, America belongs to white men. Nathan Damigo, a person referred to by this newspaper as emblematic of the young, web-savvy racists who are trying to intellectualize and mainstream bigotry, is setting his sights on higher education, eager for the attention brought on by hostile audiences or for the opportunity to claim victimization if denied a venue. Hate speech is like mold: Its enemies are bright light and fresh air. There have been calls to ban these speakers from campus, and in some cases controversial figures have been blocked or disinvited. No doubt many campus leaders, faculty and students are hoping that the likes of Spencer and Damigo will skip them, never darkening their quads and campaniles. But I think theres a better response: Confront the problem head-on. As raw and painful as the resulting interactions might be, they represent an opportunity to educate students and society more generally on how to recognize and mount an effective attack against hatred, bigotry, ignorance and bullying. Universities support free speech and condemn censorship for two reasons to ensure that positive, helpful, illuminating messages can circulate widely, and to expose hateful or dangerous ideas that, if never engaged or rebutted, would gain traction in the darker corners of our society. Hate speech is like mold: Its enemies are bright light and fresh air. Whenever we encounter hateful and demeaning ideas on campus, we mustnt run away; we must and will double down on asserting our essential commitment to human dignity and respect. This is what Texas A&M did so effectively when it countered Spencers talk with its Aggies United event denouncing hatred and bigotry. Piecemeal responses arent enough, though. Too many people, on and off campus, were caught off guard by the reemergence of white nationalism. At the beginning of the year, few people had even heard the term alt-right, let alone knew what it signified. This represents a failure of education, as well as the much-discussed failure of journalism. Because the fundamental mission of colleges and universities is to advance understanding about important matters, we must marshal our scholarly resources to explore more systematically this dangerous national and global phenomenon. On my campus, we will be working with all the relevant schools and disciplines to educate our community about current events, the historical and global dynamics underlying the politics of hate, and the related threat of authoritarianism. Some of this programming will be designed for a broader audience of students and community members. We will also bring together scholars from around the world to plan research agendas, share the results of the best studies, and debate various theories and hypotheses about the short- and long-term consequences of these developments. At issue, ultimately, is not merely the very real experience of pain and outrage that accompanies contact with hateful speech. Its the ability of free, diverse and democratic societies to maintain their essential practices and values. This moment is about much more than the consequences of allowing an ignorant speaker or two to express themselves on a campus. Democracies are more fragile things than we might like to believe. The World Value Survey recently reported a dramatic uptick in the percentage of people who believe it is a good thing to have a strong leader without elections or parliament. Universities must rise to the occasion by learning more and teaching more about what is happening, where it is happening, why it is happening and how it might be most effectively addressed. Howard Gillman is a professor of law, political science and history, and the chancellor of UC Irvine. He is co-author, with Erwin Chemerinsky, of the forthcoming book Free Speech on Campus.
