Comments

The war against free speech marches on — 44 Comments

1. WATERBUFFALO! And here we are 26 years later.

   ‘Institutions of learning’?

   So, yes. Learning how to be worse.

2. Reading FIRE’s letter, they brought out all their heavy guns and brought them to bear on UConn. They also remind the President that he, and the arresting officers, are also open to civil action by the defendants even if the charges are dismissed.

   It’s not surprising this has happened; it is just a more egregious example of the atmosphere at all colleges. I just hope they pay a heavy price in the courts for the action.

3. I sent that out a while ago. might not have included you because you seldom put up anything i send… and the few exceptions that prove the rule most dont credit..

   there are other things like this.

   your about to watch your country change like my grandparents country
   czech and slovakia… i TOLD you to read up on that to recognize things

   but i am tired of pointing to things early, with the idea of prevention and knowing
   only to be ignored, then have it happen, then like now, sound like an idiot reminding..

   and yet, nothing will change, we will go down
   as no one, not one, will stand up agianst the feminists

   you girls got the country you wanted, because your men were NOT abusers
   did you figure that out? if we stopped them, what would we be?

   maybe ladies werent in government before because their history is betrayal
   did you know that?

   not to mention treating the state like a husband or a boyfriend..
   Angels – My Boyfriend’s Back
   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NuofNHKbVc

   at least the guys over at mancoat were the group of us started MGTOW
   are quite in the know… not that 18% below replacement means anything

   have fun with this one
   and remember
   what you say here is evidence, and it can be used against you
   not to mention, what you have said over the past 15 years
   could require re-education too.

   and they thought i was nutty for not having a facebook page cause i didn’t like the major funders, helpers, and so on, were a Russian siloviki.. and then there was that speech by Gorbachev that not being soviet was for consumption – “they would never turn from that road”

   at least the ex soviets know how to live under that kind of thing

4. Artfldgr:

   Most of the time I don’t have time to pay much attention to what people send me in terms of links, although sometimes I do. When someone sends me a link and I wrote about that subject because of the sending of the link, rather than because I came to the story independently, I credit that person and sometimes send the person an email giving him or her a heads-up. I have credited you various times I have responded to a link of yours, just as I have with other people.

   And no, it’s not what “you girls” wanted, although absolutely some of this is a result of feminist acitivism. However, I have fought against this (as I’ve mentioned several times) since the early 1990s, which is when I had a personal experience at a university that led me to understand just what was happening.

5. University of Connecticut students shout racial slurs on campus
   https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=3&v=KchpdyG5fjU

   This will give you a HINT how far its gone while you all distracted yourself

   PROOF: YOUTUBE CENSORED TULSI GABBARD | Louder with Crowder
   https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=YHHQl3ND6bk

   from turning off her ads during debates
   to not letting any search give information in the USA (but ok outside)
   and a lot more

   but note..
   remember when i wrote the post that the LAST law against Communism that would have a legal standing went bye bye

   good thing we didnt care…
   [caring defined as more than sitting and bantering]

   Antifa is responding to this and giving threats
   and others are doing other things

   transgender person sets woman on fire in restaurant
   people were getting beaten up.. we normalized that
   whole crowds were stomping on a kids head, but we didnt care

   I guess not knowing HOW things did the change mechanically as a reproducible process today, you might have to be willing to be set on fire, tortured, killed or stomped on just to walk around..

   The Left Has Become a Cult of Violence
   https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=9&v=s2SFR9l4HUw

   here is your education system.. can you imagine how long you have to do nothing and pretend your not sure, and not get involved to have this happen:

   The Seattle school district is planning to infuse all K-12 math classes with ethnic-studies questions that encourage students to explore how math has been “appropriated” by Western culture and used in systems of power and oppression…

   The district’s proposed framework outlines strands of discussion that teachers should incorporate into their classes. … Seattle is taking a highly unusual approach by weaving the field’s multicultural and political questions not just through all grade levels, but into all subjects.

   The Association of Mathematics Teacher Educators’ standards for teacher preparation, for instance, say new math teachers should “understand the roles of power, privilege, and oppression in the history of mathematics education.”

   • [M]ath has been and continues to be used to oppress and marginalize people and communities of color.

   • [T]he standardized testing system [is] used to oppress and marginalize people and communities of color.

   and you thought feminist math was a joke..

   at BEST… you MAY have 4 years
   you may not though
   wait till the ladies figure it out and what they did…
   but, i doubt it..

6. Here is an example of the attacks on free speech the Left and a masterful rebuttal by Ben Carson.

   https://twitter.com/RepWexton/status/1186691487368699906?s=19

7. College students should be required to listen to a Lenny Bruce routine before receiving a diploma.

8. Good to know the ACLU hasn’t totally caved — David Cole, legal director of the national ACLU, had the following reaction: “Although the conduct reported in this incident is reprehensible, it is not criminal. The First Amendment protects even offensive and hateful speech, so long as it does not rise to the level of incitement to violence, criminal harassment, or true threats. Nothing in the press reports indicates that the students’ speech, while morally abhorrent, meets that demanding standard. The ACLU has long supported robust constitutional protections for speech, including speech we vehemently oppose.”

   https://www.acluct.org/en/press-releases/statement-regarding-racism-uconn-storrs-campus

9. Poll: Majority of Americans Want First Amendment Rewritten
   51 percent of Millennials want fines or jail time for ‘hate speech’

   A majority of Americans believe the First Amendment should be rewritten and are willing to crack down on free speech, as well as the press, according to a new poll.

   More than 60 percent of Americans agree on restricting speech in some way, while a slim majority, 51 percent, want to see the First Amendment rewritten to “reflect the cultural norms of today.” The Campaign for Free Speech, which conducted the survey, said the results “indicate free speech is under more threat than previously believed.”

   “The findings are frankly extraordinary,” executive director Bob Lystad told the Washington Free Beacon. “Our free speech rights and our free press rights have evolved well over 200 years, and people now seem to be rethinking them.”

   Of the 1,004 respondents, young people were the most likely to support curbing free expression and punishing those who engage in “hate speech.” Nearly 60 percent of Millennials—respondents between the ages of 21 and 38—agreed that the Constitution “goes too far in allowing hate speech in modern America” and should be rewritten, compared to 48 percent of Gen Xers and 47 percent of Baby Boomers. A majority of Millennials also supported laws that would make “hate speech” a crime—of those supporters, 54 percent said violators should face jail time.

   https://freebeacon.com/issues/poll-majority-of-americans-want-first-amendment-rewritten/

10. And no, it’s not what “you girls” wanted, although absolutely some of this is a result of feminist acitivism. However, I have fought against this (as I’ve mentioned several times) since the early 1990s, which is when I had a personal experience at a university that led me to understand just what was happening.

    yes.. your the exceptions that prove the rule..
    and you prove my point on this..
    and what have you done to ‘fight’?

    1990s.. nice… how many decades late?
    and because it impacted you, otherwise, blithly about your business
    what if it didnt impact you..

    the new school is 75% women..
    how you get that?

    Men have no rights.. didnt you know that?
    thats why i lost my son to a woman that faked her murder
    AND took the kids to go rob a bank..

    go back and look how each brick was replaced in the wall till you have a new wall
    who kicked men out of schools
    who made any opposition proof of patriarchan oppression
    who changed education, business, law, and even constitutional things like being able to know your accusers?
    who broke up mens areas, but kept their own areas?
    who made 60/40 the new equal?

    take some time and take a look..

    and realize that this was a battle that ONLY women could fight
    and if they didnt, or didnt fight hard enough, then the end was a done deal!!!

    did you fight enough to be happy when the changes come and nothing you can do?
    will you be happy when the door closes like Eli Weissel describes

    did you even bother to read Ruta to learn that? the dream that would not die?
    in 15 years.. not one recommended book – not even on your side bar

    did you really realize that not only was your nation at stake, but since your Jewish, all Jews were at stake.. and since your Caucasian, your the source of evil, so thats not going to work either.. and in case you didnt realize it, when a big conflict comes, you think china and russia will go pop popcorn and enjoy the show?

    i dont think you or others actually realized the stakes and that unless you died first, you were going to be in the blender in some way…soft (like venzeula) or hard after 30 million Chinese work out.. did you see the drone fireworks show? can you imagine a swarm of a million drones solar powered each with a high explosive charge, a destination on global positioning, and another 10 million behind that?

    or the other weapons ready for the new war, the new fulfillment of the Magyar struggle
    for the last time, it wasnt finished.

    personally, i wont live long enough to care…
    not my monkeys not my circus.

    whatever fighting you did, was it really something that would have changed the world enough to make a difference if it worked out really really good? or was it a peep in tornado, a fart in a hurricane?

    right now… you cant find things with google.. nada.
    they are slowly restricting what you can find to show others

    as i said long ago
    by the time you realize it, it will be way too late
    whose going to have the babies and raise them to change tomorrow? the men?

    you have a lot of deep thinking to do
    or you can get peeved at me
    but i did read Anne Franke, and Ruta and those other things
    i never had to be convinced..

    maybe they will have a job for me.

11. College students should be required to listen to a Lenny Bruce routine before receiving a diploma.

    parker: Perhaps this is what you have in mind…
    _____________________________________

    Dig. lf President Kennedy would
    just go on television and say
    ”l’d like to introduce you
    to all the niggers in my cabinet.”

    And if he’d just say ”nigger, nigger”
    to every nigger he saw,
    ”Boogie, boogie, boogie,
    nigger, nigger, nigger, nigger,”
    till it didn’t mean anything any more!

    Then you’d never be able
    to make a black kid cry
    because somebody called him
    a nigger in school.

    –Lenny Bruce, “Are there any niggers here tonight?”
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IaRqDc41IFQ
    ____________________________________

    Bruce was ahead of his time but not so far ahead he could see blacks, liberals, academics, entertainers and youth become the opponents of free speech.

12. Huxley,

    Reading this posting, I was thinking to myself, “Where is Lenny Bruce when we need him?”

13. Does a duck need to know its a duck to still be a duck… or do you think you can believe your something else and still be a duck without knowing what you are?

    Poll: Few Identify As Feminists, But Most Believe In Equality Of Sexes

    Broken down by party, 32 percent of Democrats, 19 percent of independents and only 5 percent of Republicans said they are feminists.

    however, the ones that aren’t dont matter..
    because it doesnt matter what you believe you are
    it matters what you believe and act on when there is no label

    
    But asked if they believe that “men and women should be social, political, and economic equals,” 82 percent of the survey respondents said they did, and just 9 percent said they did not. Equal percentages of men and women said they agreed with that statement, along with 87 percent of Democrats, 81 percent of independents and 76 percent of Republicans.

    Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines feminism as “the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes.”

    and your in this category
    few Americans think that most others identify as feminists. Only 27 percent said they thought most women are feminists (37 percent said a majority are not, and 36 percent said they weren’t sure), and only 7 percent said they thought most men are feminists (67 percent said a majority are not, and 27 percent said they weren’t sure).

14. now if you think this is bad, you better not talk about it.

    Nationally, over 57 percent of college attendees are female when public and private school stats are combined. Female students have been consistently edging ahead of their male classmates since the late 1970s when the percentages flip-flopped

    Aside from all-female schools, there are others that have marked disproportionate numbers. [its actually worse given foreign students who are mostly male, are counted]

    new school.. 75% female

    At Indiana University Northwest, located just outside Gary, 67 percent of the student population is female.

    Pacific Oaks College in Pasadena has nearly 96 percent females in attendance

    the University of Tennessee Health Sciences Center in Memphis has over 93 percent

    women have earned 13 million more degrees than men since 1982.
    [but i thought they were for equality]

    Chart of the day: The incredible 13M gender college degree gap since 1982 favoring women

    1. Interestingly, Title IX was passed in 1972 when women were the minority gender in higher education, and in that year earned only 43.6% of bachelor’s degrees and 39.7% of master’s degrees.

    2. By 1978, women earned the majority of associate’s degrees, and currently earn 61.3% of those degrees, which means that 158 women earn associate’s degrees today for every 100 men.

    3. By 1979, women became the majority gender for total fall college enrollment for the first time, and the female share of college enrollment increased gradually over time and is now about 56.5%. That means that there are currently about 130 women enrolled in a college degree program for every 100 men.

    4. By 1982, women became the majority gender for bachelor’s degrees for the first time, and today women earn 57.4% of bachelor’s degrees, which means there are 135 women earning bachelor’s degrees for every 100 men. Stated as a degree gap, there is a gender bachelor’s degree gap of 26.1% in favor of women (798,000 degrees for men vs. 1,077,00 degrees for women = 25.9% degree gap). For blacks, the gender college degree gap is even much larger: black women earned 178.2 bachelor’s degrees in 2017 for every 100 degrees earned by black men

    5. Starting in 1987, women became the permanent majority gender for master’s degrees, and currently earn 58.4% of master’s degrees, which is 140.4 women earning a master’s degree for every 100 men. For blacks, the master’s degree gap is even wider: there are 232.1 black females earning master’s degrees for every 100 black males.

    6. In every year since 2006, women have earned a majority of doctor’s degree, and currently earn 111.4 doctoral degrees for every 100 degrees earned by men.

    7. On a cumulative basis, women have earned 13 million more college degrees than men at all levels (associate’s, bachelor’s, master’s and doctor’s degrees) over the last 36 years since 1982 — 55.5 million degrees for women vs. 42.4 million degrees for men (131 female degrees per 100 male degrees), and women have earned 5.8 million more bachelor’s degrees than men over that period — 27.9 million degrees for women vs. 22.1 million degrees for men.

15. In the linked article, the demands by the university chapter of the NAACP and a comment by the UConn President stood out;

    “The university chapter of the NAACP also demanded school officials disband a fraternity where a second incident of alleged racial discrimination took place, update the university’s student code of conduct regarding hate speech, hire a slate of new black staff members and implement a new mandatory diversity course.”

    “This, or any similar incident, is deplorable and antithetical to the values of our community and the university as a whole. It has no place on our campuses — or anywhere.” UConn President Thomas Katsouleas

    my emphasis

    It’s all about the power to dominate and control, pure and simple.

16. and it IS you girls!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    From Suffrage to Suppression: Women Now Lead in Anti-Speech Sentiment
    Two recent polls, one that sampled college students and another that sampled Americans in general, highlight a disturbing trend among women’s views on free speech rights.

    When asked how important it is to protect citizens’ rights to free speech, a very slim majority of women (51%) responded that it was “extremely important” compared to 62% of men.

    64% of the women polled picked diversity and inclusion as most important, while 35% chose protecting free speech. The college men answered it in reverse with 61% choosing to protect free speech and 39% prioritizing diversity and inclusion.

    Other disturbing responses from women include the 71% who believe that “hate speech” should not be protected by the First Amendment, even though hate speech is subjective and no one can agree on what constitutes hate speech. 56% of college men believe the First Amendment does not cover so-called hate speech; a full 15 points lower than the women.

    33% of women said it was important for colleges to create a positive environment by prohibiting speech that is offensive or biased against certain groups vs. 23% of men who said the same.

    34% of women said colleges should be able to restrict political speech, as opposed to 24% of men. 95% of women support “safe spaces” (men, 77%), 90% of women support free speech zones (men, 75%), and 58% of the women support speech codes (men, 37%). 74% of women think social media platforms should be responsible for limiting hate speech on their platforms vs. 61% of men.

    in category after category… its not the men
    maybe your the girl that doesnt think so… but who cares?
    your not making policy, and they would beat the crap out of you otherwise
    the men would be oppressors to say anything.

    the fact that women consistently answered in a more anti-speech manner on just about every question is something that free speech advocates need to recognize and investigate.

    no…neo just gave us the answer on that..
    go back to sleep… nothing can be done.
    what men want to be oppressors and have a nation of women dislike them
    and split their families and such…they already have few rights..

    The question remains – why are women so ready to throw away free speech rights? It’s ironic to think about the history of free speech as it relates directly to women through women’s suffrage. That women demanded the right to vote was extremely offensive to many people, including many American men and other women. It is likely that opponents of women’s suffrage would have categorized pro-suffrage speech as “hate speech” if they had had the phrase at the time. Do women today really want to be the leaders in a movement to stifle free speech?

    Why Are Female College Students Against Free Speech?
    https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/03/college-free-speech-poll-female-students-favor-diversity-inclusion/

    A recent poll of college students found that just 35 percent of women favor free speech over ‘inclusion and diversity.’
    [snip]
    Majorities of students polled said they support both free speech and “inclusion and diversity.” When asked which is more important, 53 percent said inclusion and diversity, and only 46 percent said free speech.

    What I found most striking — the numbers that stood out for me — was the difference between men and women. Among men, 61 percent favored free speech. But only 35 percent of women did so. That’s a result I certainly hadn’t expected.

    That percentage is of particular concern because women now make up the majority of college and university students. They appear to be a preponderance of the campus administrators who administer and enforce schools’ speech and sexual assault codes, at a time when administrators outnumber teachers in higher education.

    as i said.. its the women..

    Psychological studies over many years conclude that women tend to prize agreeableness and consensus, whereas men tend to seek out conflict and competition. One can easily imagine evolutionary explanations for this group difference, which, of course, is not apparent in every individual.

    Female students’ willingness to subordinate free speech to political values is disturbing in a time when habits of mind and behavior developed on campus tend to leach out to the larger society.

    That has been apparent in the behavior of Silicon Valley firms such as Google and Facebook, which have imposed campus-like standards in censoring material on YouTube and Facebook feeds. Their corps of recent graduates have often labeled anodyne conservative themes as “hate speech” while granting full access to such bigots as Louis Farrakhan.

    [snip]

    Those who have welcomed women’s greater opportunities and increasing achievements have assumed that a less male-dominated world would be more welcoming and free. The campus poll and Silicon Valley practices suggest that it may turn out to be at least a little more Orwellian.

    and from first amendment watch NY university

    Most college men (74 percent) support hate speech protections under the First Amendment compared to less than half (46 percent) of college women.
    [snip]
    When asked if protecting extreme forms of speech is more important than promoting an inclusive society, 71 percent of college men favor protecting free speech over inclusivity, while 58 percent of college women favor inclusivity over free speech protections.

    and of course.. (sarcasm)us men have to oppress them to rebalance this(/sarcasm)
    cause saying you girls offends the girls so much… they claim to be fighting
    well, i claim they are losing if that is true…and by doing, letting the others define it all
    again.. (sarcasm)or should men re-assert themselves violently to fix it (/sarcasm)

    washington post

17. Reading this posting, I was thinking to myself, “Where is Lenny Bruce when we need him?”

    Roy Nathanson: So sad, so true.

    Today’s war on some words isn’t about freedom or equality or compassion — these Red Guard goons aren’t “triggered” and they con’t care — it’s about power.

18. Then there’s this baffling business. A New School teacher, Laurie Sheck, did author James Baldwin the proper honor of quoting his words accurately, after an SJW documentary bowdlerized Baldwin. Then some Red Guard student claimed to be triggered so Sheck was investigated.
    _________________________________________________________

    The New School dropped its investigation against poet and novelist Laurie Sheck. Sheck, who is white, had been the focus of an inquiry triggered by a student complaint that she’d used the N-word in her graduate-level creative writing class when quoting the late black writer James Baldwin.

    Sheck admitted she used the word in class, but said previously that it was a part of a discussion on Baldwins 1962 essay “The Creative Process.” Baldwin, a frequent critic of U.S. race relations, wrote in the essay about the “nature of the artist’s responsibility to his society. The peculiar nature of this responsibility is that he must never cease warring with it, for its sake and for his own.”

    Broadening the conversation, Sheck asked if anyone in class had seen the acclaimed 2016 documentary about Baldwin called “I Am Not Your Negro.” She then noted that Baldwin had used the actual N-word during the interview from which the documentary took its name — saying the actual slur herself.

    https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2019/08/19/creative-writing-professor-cleared-discrimination-saying-slur-quoting-james-baldwin
    ___________________________________________________________

    I’m not a big James Baldwin fan, but the man could write and he would not suffer fools to tamper with his carefully chosen words, whatever their claimed intentions.

    I’m surprised Sheck got off. I can’t believe how absurd and dangerous things have become.

19. physicsguy on October 24, 2019 at 3:54 pm said:
    Reading FIRE’s letter, they brought out all their heavy guns and brought them to bear on UConn. They also remind the President that he, and the arresting officers, are also open to civil action by the defendants even if the charges are dismissed.
    * * *
    Oberlin College 2.0?

20. Geoffrey Britain on October 24, 2019 at 5:47 pm said:
    In the linked article, the demands by the university chapter of the NAACP and a comment by the UConn President stood out; ….”implement a new mandatory diversity course.”
    * * *
    Which is why Jordan Peterson is the new Superstar in the conservative firmament, as Neo noted.

21. PS I am not sure how, exactly, this — “hire a slate of new black staff members” — is supposed to reduce incidences of “hate speech” on campus.
    Will they be patrolling the halls, quads, and parking lots, perhaps with beadle staves?

22. Ann on October 24, 2019 at 4:27 pm said:
    Good to know the ACLU hasn’t totally caved …
    * * *
    True, but what’s their current batting average in favor of freedom?

    Also, what is truly frightening is the language used in the NAACP letter to which ACLU is responding. Given, that particular organization has an historic and legitimate vested interest in combating racism (properly defined) and any associated behavior, but none of the remedies they demand here have ever been shown to be effective, and some have had just the opposite of the intended outcome. Right now, they look more interested in becoming a full-employment labor union than a bastion of liberty for their constituency — who have been harmed more by (allegedly) well-intentioned but (mostly) misguided protectionism than they have been helped.

    https://www.acluct.org/en/press-releases/statement-regarding-racism-uconn-storrs-campus

    The UConn NAACP has provided administrators with a list of eight feasible steps university officials can take to enact structural changes that support Black students and all students of color on campus. These include creating a requisite First Year Experience course focused on ending racism on campus, updating the Student Code of Conduct to create specific guidelines about racism and hate speech, hiring at least 10 Black faculty and staff, protecting students who have exposed racism on campus, investigating the fraternity where a student targeted another with a racial slur and holding that fraternity accountable accordingly, requiring public apologies from that fraternity, issuing a statement condemning racist acts on campus, and that the university complete all of these tasks by the Spring 2020 semester.

    Policing is an inherently white supremacist institution, and we remain skeptical of its ability to address racism and bigotry. Under existing free speech case law the students who were arrested will almost certainly not be convicted, making it imperative for the university to immediately address racism on campus, including but not limited to these recent incidents.

    As a public institution, UConn bears a constitutional responsibility to ensure students of color have equal access to education, which means equal access to a learning environment where they are safe.

    No one has adduced any evidence that any person at UConn was in any actual (or even potential) danger at any time; that is, no one was ever unsafe.
    In fact, the person who made the video admitted that at first he didn’t understand what the defendants were saying, and had to turn up the volume in order to become offended.
    Per the FIRE letter to UConn (“seldom used statute”):

    The student recording the exchange couldn’t hear the use of the [n-]word as he recorded it and only heard it when he replayed the video and turned the volume up, at which point he contacted police.

23. The students arrested had Albanian and Turkish surnames. I suspect part of the problem was that they hadn’t yet been completely assimilated in American culture, and thus had a limited view of what was and wasn’t verboten here.

    2 UConn students charged after allegedly shouting racial slur.

    UConn President Thomas Katsouleas, who attended the rally, issued a statement in support of the arrests.
    “It is supportive of our core values to pursue accountability, through due process, for an egregious assault on our community that has caused considerable harm.”

    But when the “egregious assaults on our community” involve basketball players at Basketball U, UConn has not been so harsh. UPDATED: UConn’s Sad Criminal History. For example, in 2005, basketball players Marcus Williams and A.J. Price stole four laptops from other students- including UConn women basketball players. A.J. Price was suspended for one semester of classes and one year of basketball. Marcus Williams, being a more valuable player than Price, was suspended for 9 games. Both went on to play in the NBA- Williams for 3 years, and Price for 6 years .(Katsouleas was not UConn President at this time.)

24. huxley on October 24, 2019 at 4:49 pm said:
    College students should be required to listen to a Lenny Bruce routine before receiving a diploma.

    parker: Perhaps this is what you have in mind…
    * * *
    As a general rule, I do not personally have an interest in Bruce’s style of comedy, that being of a generally offensive nature to such sheltered snowflakes as myself, but my response has been to avoid his & others’ performances, not to shut them down. Guess that’s part of what makes me not-a-Democrat.
    However, in the instance that you quoted of breaking down maladaptive avoidance coping, I totally agree with him.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avoidance_coping

25. Roy Nathanson on October 24, 2019 at 4:20 pm said:
    Here is an example of the attacks on free speech the Left and a masterful rebuttal by Ben Carson.

    https://twitter.com/RepWexton/status/1186691487368699906?s=19
    * * *
    I would probably have voted for Dr. Carson had he stayed a viable primary candidate.
    In re his comment (which is statistically true), the Bee is also on target.

    https://babylonbee.com/news/man-identifying-6-year-old-crushes-game-winning-homer-tee-ball-championship

26. The one kid is Albanian. Which, means, despite the first name “Ryan” he has a fifty-fifty shot of being Moslem. Its be interesting to see how the intersectionality on that bears out.

27. The one kid is Albanian. Which, means, despite the first name “Ryan” he has a fifty-fifty shot of being Moslem. Its be interesting to see how the intersectionality on that bears out.

    Not to mention the other kid being Turk in origin, which would give him being about a 98% chance of being Moslem. Then there is John Belushi, who was of Albanian origin, IIRC. So, ethnicity and religion, when you consider the likes of John Belushi, isn’t a straight 1-1 prediction.

    https://forebears.io/surnames/karal

    I

28. As a general rule, I do not personally have an interest in Bruce’s style of comedy, that being of a generally offensive nature to such sheltered snowflakes as myself, but my response has been to avoid his & others’ performances, not to shut them down. Guess that’s part of what makes me not-a-Democrat.

    AesopFan: That’s something I noticed in the sixties/seventies culture wars. Conservatives and regular Americans decided that long hair, marijuana, premarital sex and homosexuality weren’t hills they wanted to die on. So live and let live. Considering how hot those issues were at the beginning, that’s impressive.

    So far the current version of the counterculture shows no indication of such grace and wisdom.

    PS. These days Lenny Bruce seems only mildly outrageous. Some bad language, sex and drug references, controversial social commentary and that’s about it. A surprising amount of Bruce’s material is so outdated, it doesn’t make sense in this century.

29. Huxley
    Conservatives and regular Americans decided that long hair, marijuana, premarital sex and homosexuality weren’t hills they wanted to die on. So live and let live.

    One of the more memorable adjustments came from my grandmother. I had hitched 1,000 miles to attend a ceremony honoring my grandfather- so I was implicitly saying that my attachment to my grandparents continued regardless of hair length. But I did wear a coat and tie for the ceremony.(Which they knew anyway, as it wasn’t the first time I had combined thumb and long hair to see them.) My grandmother told me that she never thought she would say this, but she thought my long hair didn’t look half bad. My other grandmother, well let’s say she gritted her teeth.

30. So, of course, I went back into the Bruce archives. Here’s a bit which still makes me laugh out loud. (I refuse to write LOL.)

    Now, a Jew, in the dictionary, is one who is descended from the ancient tribes of Judea, or one who is regarded as descended from that tribe.

    That?s what it says in the dictionary; but you and I know what a Jew is—One Who Killed Our Lord. I don?t know if we got much press on that in Illinois—we did this about two thousand years ago…

    And although there should be a statute of limitations for that crime, it seems that those who neither have the actions nor the gait of Christians, pagan or not, will bust us out, unrelenting dues, for another deuce. And I really searched it too, why we pay the dues. Why do you keep breaking our balls for this crime?

    “Why, Jew? Because you skirt the issue. You blame it on the Roman soldiers.”

    All right, I?ll clear the air once and for all, and confess. Yes, we did it. I did it, my family. I found a note in my basement. It said:

    We killed him.
    signed, Morty.

    And a lot of people say to me, “Why did you kill Christ?” I dunno…it was one of those parties, got out of hand, you know. We killed him because he didn?t want to become a doctor, that?s why we killed him.

    –Lenny Bruce, “Jews Killed Christ”

31. Gringo: My grandparents were classic, self-made Oklahoma Republicans. They had no idea what to do when their children and grandchildren went beatnik, then hippie. Though they remained bewildered and hurt, they never put the hammer down on any of us to go straight.

    The only generational moment I recall was when Pap (my grandfather) and I were in my younger brother’s bedroom. My brother was in trouble with the police and meth. Pap pointed at the psychedelic Beatles poster on the wall and said, “It was [the Beatles]. That’s when things went wrong.”

    But Pap was grasping. Whatever had gone wrong, had gone wrong well before the Beatles. And I still haven’t been able to figure it out.

32. Something to watch for, on the horizon, are the intelligent young males who are reading BRONZE AGE MINDSET, a book by an author identified only as Bronze Age Pervert. This book is getting a lot more attention than I would have expected. This represents the next step after Jordan Peterson.

    BAP says in The American Thinker that the “movement” (which is inevitably called Alt-Right) consists of Latins, Asians, Mixed Race as well as Whites.

    BRONZE AGE MINDSET is a fascinating read.

33. Artfldgr:

    In your 6:03 PM comment you wrote, regarding the fact that women measure more anti-free-speech than men do, and that this needs to be recognized and investigated : “neo just gave us the answer on that..go back to sleep… nothing can be done.”

    At no point have I indicated anything of the sort. I believe it is true and I think it does bear investigation. My hypothesis is that the reason for this is the greater importance women tend to give to feelings as a measure of what’s good and bad, and right and wrong. I also pointed out that that is not true of all women.

    In addition, there are plenty of men who now buy into this, particularly in academe. And there are many ways to fight it, including a court challenge as I mentioned in the post.

34. At the time of Lenny Bruce “free speech” wasn’t really the issue. Power for dictator types was the real issue. But for Bruce and most fellow travelers, “free speech” WAS the issue.

    All movements are subject to being hijacked by folks who have a different agenda than the publicly stated agenda.

    At the time, I thought the vulgarization of the culture was cool. Especially the forbidden sex words. (Famous Bruce skit naming all 7, over and over). The racial / ethnic slurs, not so much.

    The attempt to ban the slurs that racists use is part of the attempt to ban racism, as PC folk define it. The slur-shaming actually does work, in reducing the willingness of normal folk to use such slurs — so extremely bad manners. Yet making slurs taboo, also gives those words more power. So the rap culture is full of songs with all kinds of sex & racial slurs and words.

    Getting rid of racism is the issue for many fellow travelers. They might even believe they’re helping, while it’s pretty clear that driving the feelings into an inexpressible status intensifies the feelings — a lot of anti-racist actions are now actually increasing racism. Arguably.

    Getting power is the issue for many of the leaders of the anti-racism hysteria. Getting power is usually the issue.

    More court challenges to this nonsense, with higher penalties on those authorities who fail to protect Free Speech, would be a good way to fight this. Colleges should probably be explicitly asking about their feelings on free speech, and accepting fewer who oppose free speech for those who disagree.

35. The solution for higher ed is to bypass it, not fight for years trying to fix it.

    What if state governments forced state universities to award credits via examination. They could be mixed with credits earned by sitting through the classes and would result in the same degree.

    The instruction needed to pass these examinations would be provided by the free market. This would create an explosion of free market providers of educational services and end the current abused monopoly status of academia.

    The credentialing exams should also allow retaking, with higher grade points reflecting life experience and added study. The tests should not be pass/fail, but actually indicate the test score. To stop indoctrination, an appeals procedure staffed by volunteer alumni should allow review of grades where other than multiple choice questions are part of the grade. Total transparency at the student’s option should be required.

    Universities would become associations of scholars, who would set standards for degrees and courses, but would make their livings working for free market education providers, in industry, or by creating material that had a paying audience.

    In the fast approaching world of the future, continual education will become the norm. It is time to open the provision of educational services to the free market in a truly meaningful way.

36. At the time of Lenny Bruce “free speech” wasn’t really the issue. Power for dictator types was the real issue. But for Bruce and most fellow travelers, “free speech” WAS the issue.

    Tom Grey: Well, I leave it to individuals to choose their issues, plural. There rarely is one issue at stake.

    Besides Bruce didn’t choose “free speech” anymore than Stephen King chose horror. Bruce was a beatnik and a junkie, he moved in those circles and that’s how his humor worked. As he became more famous, his humor became an issue for authorities. They decided to make an example of Bruce and basically hounded him to death.

    The “7 Words” skit was George Carlin’s. However, Carlin was all but a disciple of Bruce, so your attribution is an understandable mistake.

    Funny you should mention the term, “dictator types.” One of Bruce’s best skits involved “dictator types”:
    ____________________________________

    Bruce’s own most notorious ‘satire’ involved Hitler. The satire, however, was not directed at Hitler himself but at Hollywood. In Bruce’s skit, a group of impressarios call up ‘central casting’ to see if they can find the ‘dictator type.’ And after allowing three actors to do their Hitler impressions they discover the ‘schlob in the white uniform who is painting the wall.’ They sign him up, get together a rhythm section with some `tunes from Leonard Bernstein’ and give him an ‘armband’ (‘something lucky the squares will dig’) which has not been done ‘since Attila the Hun’.

    This skit highlights the Jewish media cynicism demonstrated in Hollywood blockbuster movies. The point of Hollywood is to be as sensational as possible. Bruce’s point is not to turn Hitler into a hero, but to show how the media industry can use even the most horrendous stories purely for the sake of making money. 

37. AesopFan on October 24, 2019 at 7:09 pm,

    I could not possibly agree with you more, in every word you said. In fact what you said was probably plagiarized word-for-word direct from the thoughts in my own head! Many +++++s! 😀

    .

    And huxley, thanks very much for the quote from Mr. Bruce!

38. Left Comes After First Amendment

    We Can’t Let Them Get Away With This!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=3&v=x8Mc9bs7Mz4

39. In your 6:03 PM comment you wrote, regarding the fact that women measure more anti-free-speech than men do, and that this needs to be recognized and investigated : “neo just gave us the answer on that..go back to sleep… nothing can be done.”
    At no point have I indicated anything of the sort.
    I believe it is true and I think it does bear investigation. My hypothesis is that the reason for this is the greater importance women tend to give to feelings as a measure of what’s good and bad, and right and wrong. I also pointed out that that is not true of all women.
    In addition, there are plenty of men who now buy into this, particularly in academe. And there are many ways to fight it, including a court challenge as I mentioned in the post.

    No, you didn’t outright say it… you have to work it out from conclusions based on what was said, what the reality is, and what has changed that your not including in it.
    I hope I can do this in the space…

    1) We both believe the point is true – but if you cant investigate race and IQ, your certainly not going to be allowed to investigate this!!
    2) Your hypothesis is correct, that women give greater importance to feelings and more today than yesterday as the left validates feelings over thinking! This is because, like adorno and the drum primitivizing, feelings are a more primitive way of thinking and operating. Ie. Feelings are instincts! Feelings based thinking is more primitive, and so, women are now thinking more primitively, not more rationally
    3) Your point of it not being true of all women, is a nothing point. Nothing is all true about everyone, short of everyone that is alive is alive. It means nothing in the discussion.
    4) And men follow the women to have life. “men is the head, women is the neck”. The communist movement always used honey pots to get men involved. Not to mention that beta males have no place in a competitive society, but they think in a collective they are not beta.
    5) There is no way to fight it and that’s the point I am making. However given I have no space to make an argument that takes in a lot of stuff to draw its conclusion, and your legal argument is short, I wont be able to debate… if I am too long, it gets cut, by the opposition

    Your answer is a non-answer, its restating the facts, calling for a thing you cant do, and does not even try to understand me. it just says don’t disparage all women.. you did the same before when you would not conclude that in elections when there were fewer men, the women dominated the elections (they dominate even when there are more men). And in germany after WWI, the men who would vote were DEAD. The coverup in the books as I showed was using percentages, the SAME problem here! You have a problem with feelings (don’t like that you’re a woman and the majority is being labeled, so you stick up for them), and a problem with math and conclusions.
    Now, we can start to address the point I am trying to make that your not refuting as you didn’t try to understand it… or we can have you run off and comment on the things you don’t like above and derail the point.. which is more comfortable than actually digging in to figure out i am right or wrong.

    Next post I will try my best to lay it out based on what is actually going on, and why I am saying what I am saying based on that… and sorry, but we are going to have to convert the percentages to real numbers based on how many of X are in college and how many of Y are in college and how the Xs are leaving the political realm, and the Ys are dominating them and the schools, etc.

    the main point is that we both agree on the facts as they stand separately
    and you dont want to put them together, and i have…
    and you dont FEEL my conclusion is right, and i have rationally computed based on numbers, the rules of the game, and the level of current gliechshaltung and the potential outcomes that suppress the few women and majority of men (who arent there)

40. Tearing out the salient numbers of the posts above..
    64% of the women polled picked diversity and inclusion as most important, while 35% chose protecting free speech. 61% of the men polled picked free speech and 39% prioritizing diversity and inclusion.
    Going up a bit higher, I give the proportions of women vs men in the halls where the rule makers come from and the intelligentsia have so much power, conservatives hide like Christians in mainland china
    So lets take Indiana University Northwest and give it a 1000 person body (simplify the math)
    67% of IUN is women, 33% are men – so its 670 women for 330 men
    428 of those women are AFS (against free speech) and 241 are for it
    128 of the men are AFS and 202 are for it
    556 vs 444 in a vote… Free speech loses at IUN
    But how many of the 444 can be open about this? The men are afraid if they say something, metoo will come and get them, and other things.. and women can be really vicious to other women who don’t feel the same as they do…
    Then comes administration. how many of the 444 are willing to lose their degrees? Get bad comments in a personal record they are not allowed to see? Etc. remember the administration has its own police, and its own Star Council kangaroo courts that are Highly biased in favor of this and already practice no free speech. And last… does being for free speech violate the speech codes?
    We have not yet gone into Doxing… Twitter attacks… and more.. that like Germany and the jugend, suppressed the decent Germans that wanted nothing to do with what happened (and were the actual majority in the population). We also have not taken into account that there are already hate speech codes that are being use to make reading the dictionary definition of something, a crime! (in uk, potentially 3 years in prison)
    95% of women support “safe spaces” (men, 77%) – the math on that is even more horrid
    58% of the women support speech codes (men, 37%) – not much better
    Then if you want to fight this, are you willing to be Doxed? Your not even willing to show your face online, and I already had people at my apartment when my son was younger threatening the family and it was a lot better back then than now!!!!!!!!!!!
    Given early death, outside of college there are more women than men, and women of the underclass follow women of higher classes…or to make it simple.. given the bell curves more women think alike than men.. [don’t make me dig in medical crap to show that]
    Also, women, due to their tendency “to prize agreeableness and consensus” how many of those women are willing to openly stand up and fight the other women, the administration, and more? Enough to beat out the other majority? How about the men? How many are willing to have their lives ruined to even start protesting the majority of the women?
    And how would their fight get to the people, when the press is hiding it, facebook is taking them down, google is hiding them in the results, and youtube is stopping their revenue (and hiding them)?
    Then comes the point that to try to put it in writing, and put it up in protest, is already a criminal offense of hate speech… just making them uncomfortable is enough!!!!!!! Even printing the dictionary definition of some words and putting them up may be criminal now. Do you want to be the test?
    Huxley shows what happened to New School teacher Laurie Sheck (I may end up working at the New School!!!! Which is 75% women)… she could not read a text of a book. Good thing she didn’t try to cover H “RAP” Brown and his book that spurred the hateful music “die Ni**r die”.
    When I said what I said.. I was drawing the conclusion that this wake up, is way too late. In fact, maybe 15 years ago, it might have been possible to start something, now? Not at all. I said if you wait till its easy to see, then its over.
    Your not going to get the administrators of college to allow your investigation!! They will quash it so fast your head would spin…
    There was a recent meme… “islam is right about women”
    A friend made a T-shirt on Merch for Amazon.. the shirt sold.

    Merch by Amazon – Compliance Violation
    Dear Content Creator,
    Thank you for your recent design submission on Merch by Amazon – ISLAM is Right about Women T-Shirt. We are contacting you because your design appears to violate our Content Policy – 2.4 Promotion of Hate or Intolerance.

    Content Policy applies to your designs, product names, keywords on the detail page and the brand name selected. If we find future instances where submitted content does not comply with our Content Policy and your Merch by Amazon Services Agreement with us, we may terminate your Merch by Amazon account.

    We value your participation and appreciate your careful attention to this matter. To ensure that your Merch by Amazon account stays in good standing, please ensure you are fully compliant with all Content Policies in future submissions.

    They are not required to explain how that sentence is hate speech or who it hates..
    Can you?
    You cant appeal.. and you can lose your ability to support yourself
    You can lose your job, your blog, and be doxed…

    So NEO.. you being one of those few women who think free speech is important.
    Are you willing to risk it to fight? Honestly… are you willing to lose your income? Home? Maybe even your life if your swatted? If you were male, would you be wiling to be tarnished by a metoo claim?
    Sorry.. my point stands… we are way past the point of doing something. Unless you have an idea that isn’t civil war, and can teach these kids and others in the next four years or so that took 40 years to establish – there is nothing to be done.
    We have to lose our freedom, to know it was worth fighting for…
    IF you wanted to save it, we had to fight harder back when it was more ambiguous and more people would have not believed… but that never happens, and by the time its obvious, its too late..

41. And huxley, thanks very much for the quote from Mr. Bruce!

    Julie near Chicago: You’re very welcome!

    Bruce is a tough case. He wasn’t Saint Lenny, as some back then made him out. But he doesn’t deserve to be forgotten either.

42. for huxley:
    https://i0.wp.com/www.powerlineblog.com/ed-assets/2019/10/Screen-Shot-2019-10-22-at-9.12.44-PM.png?w=930&ssl=1

    for miklos:
    Michael Anton reviews Bronze Age Manhood
    https://www.claremont.org/crb/article/are-the-kids-altright/

    BAP replies to Anton
    https://americanmind.org/essays/americas-delusional-elite-is-done/

    Roundup of discussion
    https://americanmind.org/features/conservatism-in-the-bronze-age/

    I particularly liked this one
    https://americanmind.org/features/conservatism-in-the-bronze-age/bronze-age-manhood/

43. In New York, ‘disorderly conduct’ incorporates ‘making unreasonable noise’. ‘Harrassment’ incorporates a bevy of practices (e.g. following a person around) directed at a specific individual. The latter is a class b misdemeanor; the former is a submisdemeanor ‘violation’. It is a reasonable wager these two did nothing which would contravene those provisions of Connecticut law analogous to these sections of the Penal Law of New York.

    Which is to say this is yet another instance of (1) the haut bourgeois attempting to punish someone for contravening what the haut bourgeois fancy is apposite which (2) incorporates violating status codes. Blacks are a mascot group of the haut bourgeois, and ordinary people are taking advantage when they insult blacks. Again, free speech is for peers in the minds of these people. The rest of us are merely deplorables under their tutelage. The only way this stops is if people like these UConn administrators are put firmly in their place (e.g. losing their house in a lawsuit). Of course, that would have to pass through gatekeepers (judges) who are usually of similar kidney. This will not end well.

44. AesopFan on October 28, 2019 at 12:12 am said:

    for miklos (continued):
    Michael Anton replies to Bronze Age Pervert’s response to his review of Bronze Age Man
    (the post is not as facetious as the title implies)

    https://americanmind.org/post/which-way-jester-man/

    There is a core of seriousness to Bronze Age Mindset which I am sure the author intended and which will be found by those who look for it. What will they make of what they find? This is the question that presently concerns me. The other important questions—What does BAP actually believe, and what is the real truth, or as close as we can discern it?—are important but can remain topics for another day, should BAP choose to keep the dialogue going. In both his book and response, BAP appears to predict a looming end to what he calls the “New World Order” (borrowing, presumably, from George H. W. Bush). Certainly, it has to end sometime, and given its brittleness, stridency, irrationality, consuming hatreds, and antipathy to nature and natural limits, it is not unreasonable to suppose that it may end sooner rather than later. What then? In the very last chapter of Bronze Age Mindset, BAP predicts (or should that be “calls for”?) the establishment of “fortresses on the edge of the civilized world” by “superior specimens” who will “wage war” and “offer the nations of the world defense in exchange for a price.” BAP refers to this as “high piracy” without specifying what distinguishes this particular form of piracy from the low kind. I am pretty sure BAP is not being strictly literal here, and I must admit that the whole seventy-seventh chapter constitutes a whiz-bang ending. In his reply to me, BAP notes—in order to endorse—my comparison of his rhetoric to Machiavelli’s and Nietzsche’s. But that comparison, in addition to explaining (and to some degree excusing) rhetorical excess, also cuts another way. What of those readers who don’t “get the joke”? How might they interpret these, and other, BAPian declamations? Or more to the point, what might they do?

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>