Intellectual freedom under attack on campus

Anonymous Patron says:

Re:Cinnamon Stillwell makes things up

So are you saying Stillwell made these things up? For instance:

• Was Jim Gilchrist shouted down when he tried to speak at Columbia, or not?
• Was David Horowitz subject to constant disruption when he tried to speak at SFSU by members of the Spartacus Youth Club, or not?
• Was Daniel Pipes booed and jeered as a “racist” and “Zionist” when he tried to speak at UC Berkeley, or not?
• Was Nonie Darwish’s speaking engagement at Brown cancled because her views were too controversial, or not?
• Was the turnout at Walid Shoebat’s talk at Columbia affected by last minute changes to the university’s security policy, or not?

If you aren’t alleging the “or not” part of the above, then what exactly is your complaint? And if you have a specifiable complaint, can you adduce any evidence to back it up? Perhaps you think that the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) are a conservative tool, and that the academic freedom cases listed on their website are also fabricated.

–MSvF

Anonymous Patron says:

Re:Cinnamon Stillwell errors and faux credibility.

Frankly, this is the first I have heard of Stillwell, and I have no interest in defending everything she’s done. As far as I’m concerned, she’s irrelevant to the questions I pose. It is not she, but the events she describes, that is the starting point of the discussion. See my previous reply.

Perhaps she’s as bad as you say, but that has no bearing at all on whether the events she relates actually happened, and it has no bearing on the original question I posed: do the actions of the students constitute censorship?

For my own part, I’d prefer like Chuck to reserve the term ‘censorship’ for actions by the state. It doesn’t make the attempts of the students to stifle dissent from their views any less reprehensible, though.

Here are some related interesting questions: suppose Ward Churchill, or Noam Chompsky, or some other public academic from some sector of the hard left, were to speak at Columbia, and conservative student groups behaved in precisely the same manner towards that speaker as the leftist student groups did towards Horowitz et al.

1. Would that be worse that what the leftists did to the conservative speakers?
2. If the answer to the above is ‘yes’, please give your reasons.
3. Is it plausible to think that the university and the press would treat such an event the same way as they did the interventions of the lefist students?
4. If the answer to the above is ‘no’, what would explain the difference?.

For my part, I find it ironic that you choose to focus on Stillwell rather than the actual issues. I think that Franklin Saige has more than a little reason to wonder about your ideolgical affinities.

–MSvF (Melchior)

Anonymous Patron says:

Melchior, you right wing propagandist…
Melchior, you’ve outed yourself as right wing propagandist. You trolled LISNews, didn’t get the responses you wanted, and then questioned the “ideological affinities” of the commenter you couldn’t control the response of.

Anybody else reading this should be forewarned that Melchior obviously asks questions not for the answer, but rather to figure out who doesn’t meet his “ideological” smell test. He/she is witch hunting. Frankly, Melchior, you stink, if you want to play conartist games do it on your own site, it’s a big internet.

If you want to push right-wing ideology don’t assume that you’ve been given a special stage over here (though you’re welcome to share it). Seriously, the notion that You get to control the questions is just silly.

Here’s my questions if you want to continue the game: where’s your posts defending the Dixie Chix? Where’s your posts defending Bill Maher? Where’s your posts defending big ol’ Michael Moore?

Oh, wait, they don’t meet your ideological “smell test,” so don’t deserve the same courtesy as rabid, hateful rightwingers like vigilante racist Gilchrist (an old school people CENSOR) or discredited Horowitz (with his badly researched book of 100 prof’s he feels should be CENSORED).

You’re not against censorship, you’re just another vain right-winger that thinks he gets to rule the stage. (And apparently the world, how’s that going for you?)

And again, note that you are welcome to participate in conversations at LISNew, at least until the right-wing CENSORS like Newt Gingrich (and China) get their way.

By the way, if you REALLY are genuinely concerned about censorship where’s your comment decrying Newt’s belief in censoring freedom of speech for ALL Americans? Oh, wait, HE meets your “smell test”, doesn’t he? Frankly I think he stinks (and not just for trading in his wives for younger, newer models whenever he gets bored).

Anonymous Patron says:

Re:MELCHIOR DOES NOT SUPPORT FREE SPEECH
MELCHIOR THERE IS SOME TOTALLY NUTS 14-YEAR-OLD SHOUTING ON LIS NEWS!!!