Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Monday April 17 2017, @10:24AM   Printer-friendly
from the not-listening-to-all-sides dept.

Submitted via IRC for TheMightyBuzzard

An editorial in the Wellesley College student newspaper that called for "shutting down" some forms of hateful rhetoric became the latest flashpoint in a contentious national debate over free speech and its limits on college campuses.

The editorial, published Wednesday in the Wellesley News, argues that the campus community will "not stand for hate speech, and will call it out when possible."

"Shutting down rhetoric that undermines the existence and rights of others is not a violation of free speech; it is hate speech," the editorial states. "The spirit of free speech is to protect the suppressed, not to protect a free-for-all where anything is acceptable, no matter how hateful and damaging."

The editorial was widely criticized on social media as antithetical to the free exchange of ideas that is critical in a democracy and in liberal arts education. It comes as colleges across the country are wrestling with how to protect free speech in an era of trigger warnings, safe spaces, and even assaults on incendiary speakers invited to campuses.

Free speech for all. Unless they disagree with us on something...

Source: https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2017/04/14/wellesley-college-student-newspaper-ignites-free-speech-debate/NHVrp8nNensXxCQHaPLHPJ/story.html


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Monday April 17 2017, @02:03PM (7 children)

    by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 17 2017, @02:03PM (#495244) Journal

    Simply ban all intolerant speech.

    We should be absolutely intolerant of intolerant people!

    But then won't the intolerant hateful people simply move underground? (figuratively) Won't ISIS and the neo nazis find new ways to communicate and spread their message of hate?

    Maybe just don't require anyone to host hateful speech. Every platform can have a TOS. The mere existence of platforms that encourage and tolerate hate can be a useful resource. Both for mere citations and examples as well as for intelligence on the spread of hate. As a simple example, are there any books that should be burned? No matter how bad? No matter how hateful? Don't those books serve as a useful example from history? Don't we find insight into the thinking of the writings of serial killers, bombers, mass murders, and megalomaniacs?

    So maybe the simple solution is not to ban hate speech. Just don't require anyone to have to host it if they don't want to. Cockroaches find dark places to hide. You cannot ban darkness enough to exterminate them.

    --
    People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Monday April 17 2017, @03:00PM (3 children)

    by tangomargarine (667) on Monday April 17 2017, @03:00PM (#495271)

    Maybe just don't require anyone to host hateful speech.

    Pretty sure those campuses that invited Milo Yanowhatever to give a speech weren't being forced, yet he still got shouted down and forced to cancel.

    --
    "Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
    • (Score: 2) by LoRdTAW on Monday April 17 2017, @04:53PM (2 children)

      by LoRdTAW (3755) on Monday April 17 2017, @04:53PM (#495334) Journal

      The guy is a painted clown and attention seeking nobody but keeps trying to claim he was instrumental in getting trump elected. His articles were lazy and degenerated into a dumb rant and his speeches were nothing more than circus side shows specifically tailored to get a rise out of people.

      If he were coming to my campus I'd just ignore him. He wasn't inciting violence. Just diarrhea of the mouth. But no. Lets start a real circus for the clown to revel in.

      • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday April 17 2017, @04:57PM

        It doesn't matter what Milo is. Shutting him down with violence or threats thereof should be prosecuted.

        --
        My rights don't end where your fear begins.
      • (Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Monday April 17 2017, @05:55PM

        by tangomargarine (667) on Monday April 17 2017, @05:55PM (#495384)

        If he were coming to my campus I'd just ignore him.

        Or even just picket outside the auditorium or something. But no, these guys have to be in the audience shouting him down. Really quite rude to the campus bureaucrats who were trying to host the thing, too.

        --
        "Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 17 2017, @03:06PM (2 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 17 2017, @03:06PM (#495276)

    Banning of intolerant speech is itself intolerant, so ban the ban, and therefore ... you know how co-routines can call each other infinitely and blowing up the stack? It's like that.

    So blow the stack. That's the ticket.

    • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday April 17 2017, @04:59PM

      UPDATE users SET nickname = "The Stack" WHERE uid = 18;

      --
      My rights don't end where your fear begins.
    • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Monday April 17 2017, @05:30PM

      by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 17 2017, @05:30PM (#495365) Journal

      We could also be intolerant of those intolerant of intolerant speech. And ban the banning of banned speech.

      Then we could . . . oh, nevermind. It's intolerance and banning all the way down.

      --
      People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.