| |
| ▲ | hackyhacky 4 days ago | parent | next [-] | | Yes, it's false. Students have a first amendment right to express opinions, even anti-Zionist ones. The administration is using baseless charges of antisemitism as a cudgel to extract fealty and concessions from universities, which they see as opponents of their party. | | |
| ▲ | cvoss 4 days ago | parent | next [-] | | The accusation from DOJ isn't about student speech, though. It's about the university's actions or inactions, which are not protected and are governed by obligations to Title VI discrimination law. | | |
| ▲ | hackyhacky 4 days ago | parent [-] | | You're right, but the university is not allowed to censor student speech based on content. The "actions" that the administration claims the university should have taken would have violated the constitution. | | |
| ▲ | ethbr1 4 days ago | parent | next [-] | | Furthermore, the redresses the administration has proposed in similar cases (like the university reporting students who protest to federal authorities) suggest this is more about federal power / censorship than furthering universal free speech. | | |
| ▲ | fuzzfactor 4 days ago | parent [-] | | Free speech just got a price put on its head, capisce? For a one-time payment it may be able to slide this time, didn't Columbia University have an offer they couldn't refuse? Pray the Don doesn't alter the deal . . . |
| |
| ▲ | throwaway290 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > the university is not allowed to censor student speech based on content Hold on, didn't tenured professors get fired literally based on content of their speech a few years back under the other administration? I am confused And this does not have to be about censoring speech. There are rules of a place. As I said, you start obstructing a lecture, you get thrown out in a good university | |
| ▲ | davrosthedalek 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | I don't think this is quite correct, at least for private universities. They absolutely have the right to disallow protests on their property. The first amendment protects you from the government -- the government cannot force the university to take these action, but the university could totally do it on their own. It's a little bit murkier with state universities, because you could argue they are a part of the government. |
|
| |
| ▲ | throwaway290 4 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | This is a strawman. Of course there is free speech. It doesn't mean it's okay to talk on the phone in a cinema or recite the Bible aloud during a math lecture. It doesn't mean it's fair play to shout obscenities on the train and spit on people. Idk about US but there is a thing called "verbal abuse" and police is 100% callable for that. That out of the way so how about hostile environment for students again? I was downvoted for asking a question and this did not answer it. | | |
| ▲ | hackyhacky 4 days ago | parent | next [-] | | Shouting obscenities on the train, as well as hate speech broadly, are constitutionally protected under the first amendment. Creating a hostile environment for students based on their religion would violate the Civil Rights Act. However, there is a paucity of evidence that the universities did that. Allowing protests probably isn't sufficient, especially when prohibiting those same protests would be unconstitutional. Even if the protesting students were spitting on Jewish students, that doesn't impact the legality of the protest. The spitting could be prosecuted as battery. I recommend reading this [1] great article about the sometimes confusing rhetoric used in the media about American free speech. [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20220313175157/http://popehat.co... | | |
| ▲ | throwaway290 4 days ago | parent [-] | | Okay so if I get it correctly they could be kicked out like in the cinema or not, because like I assume regardless of free speech there are rules, but this "cinema" cannot be prosecuted by US gov for NOT kicking a noisy jerk out of it because then it becomes a free speech thing. If taking away grants counts as prosecution? I guess that makes sense. | | |
| ▲ | lupusreal 4 days ago | parent [-] | | State schools like UCLA cannot restrict speech in the same way that private organizations could, because they are part of the government. The cinema analogy is therefore spurious. | | |
| ▲ | davrosthedalek 3 days ago | parent | next [-] | | Honest question on this: It is clear that first amendment protects the rights of protesters from persecution by the government. But does that mean that the government would need to endure protests in any federal building at any time? If not, I think you could make a case that UCLA could kick protesters out, for example if they take over a building. In contrast to a private university, they probably couldn't act on what the protesters do outside of the university. But I do think that they must have some regulatory power on campus. | | |
| ▲ | hackyhacky 3 days ago | parent [-] | | > But does that mean that the government would need to endure protests in any federal building at any time? No. It means that the university cannot censor protests based on their content. They can certainly require protesters to get a permit, to stay within certain areas, to act within usual behavior parameters. > If not, I think you could make a case that UCLA could kick protesters out, for example if they take over a building. Of course. But that's not the claim made by the administration. |
| |
| ▲ | throwaway290 4 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | Oh right. I forgot not all unis are private in the US. Then it makes more sende... |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 4 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | > I was downvoted for asking a question and this did not answer it. I am 100% sure your comment was downvoted for this sentence: > I'm not in the US but I heard pretty interesting things about what was happening in universities following Oct 7. People here don’t like propaganda-fueled speculation. The commenter also literally answered your question. You asked if it was meant to be implied as false and they said yes. | | |
| ▲ | throwaway290 3 days ago | parent [-] | | I was not reading propaganda and he did not answer the question. I will make it shorter to make it very clear. The question: "hostile environment for students?" the answer: "free speech, cudgel, fealty". I get it and I agree wit all of that. But it is answer to some other question that was more convenient to the "answerer" | | |
| ▲ | lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 3 days ago | parent [-] | | > I was not reading propaganda I don’t doubt this but it’s also easy to read the comment as though that’s where your thoughts originate. > But it is answer to some other question that was more convenient to the "answerer" I disagree on the question being unanswered, however; you did not ask for details but instead for confirmation. I am saying this with the intention to be helpful; I am not intending to criticize your arguments. My point is simply that you did not communicate your thoughts as effectively as you seem to believe. |
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | dcre 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | It’s complete bullshit. Half the students protesting for Gaza were Jewish themselves. | | |
| ▲ | throwaway290 4 days ago | parent [-] | | This is the closest to the answer for now, thanks. I remember reading how it was pretty antisemitic with racial shaming and bordering on physical violence but can't remember what sources it was. If half of the protesters were jewish as you say then that's unlikely | | |
| ▲ | guelo 4 days ago | parent [-] | | Propaganda directed straight from netanyahu. He ordered America to censor the students in public sperches and within days America inexplicably did it. |
|
| |
| ▲ | plemer 4 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | Allowing people to speak out against overt genocide committed by a foreign government = anti-semitism. Isn’t that self-evident? /s Tbh, this standard argument is itself anti-Jewish as it implies this behavior is inherent to being Jewish, which of course is grotesque and inaccurate. * Jewish /= Zionist * Zionist /= Imperialist * Imperialist /= Genocidal What we have really imo is an extreme colonist policy that is only superficially Jewish. That doesn’t absolve Jews in Israel supporting it, it rather absolves all those who don’t and makes genocidal colonists take responsibility for their own actions. Also, genocide is bad. | | |
| ▲ | throwaway290 4 days ago | parent [-] | | Nice strawman. So how about the actual question which is hostile environment for students? I was downvoted for asking a question and this did not answer it. Edit to reply: what I remember reading was not about saying "end genocide", it was about saying "you are a jew so go die" kind of stuff. It seemed pretty crazy but I didn't save any sources | | |
| ▲ | Tadpole9181 4 days ago | parent | next [-] | | If I make a sign that says "Nazis are Evil", and a guy gets upset and says "you can't say that about me" - what do you call that guy? A Nazi. If I make a sign that says "End the Zionist Genocide", and a Jewish person says "you can't say that about me", they don't feel uncomfortable because they're Jewish. | | |
| ▲ | throwaway290 3 days ago | parent [-] | | "Zionist genocide" means a genocide of zionist people. Last time I heard it happened was WWII. This thread and replies I got is wild! | | |
| ▲ | plemer 3 days ago | parent [-] | | Do you really imagine anyone here is convinced by your petty deceptions? We know what words mean. | | |
| ▲ | throwaway290 3 days ago | parent [-] | | I'm not native English but even I know. For example when we say Ukrainian genocide we mean genocide that kills Ukrainian people. This guy said "Zionist genocide" so what does that mean? That genocide ended decades ago. Who is decepting who and how? Go ahead and unpack for us | | |
| ▲ | roenxi 3 days ago | parent [-] | | Ah right. Well if your not a native speaker - this isn't exactly a formal rule as far as I know, but as a native speaker... Zionists are ideological people and "<Idological People> Genocide" reads like the ideologues own and are committing the genocide. Whereas Ukrainian is a denonym and "<Denonym> Genocide" reads like a genocide done to the denonym. Nazi Genocide -> Nazis did it. Jewish Genocide -> Genocide happened to the Jews. I'm not sure if that is technically how it would work in a formal linguistic sense, but that would be how I'd expect the terms to be read. Zionists can't really be genocided because Zionism isn't a race, so reading "Zionist Genocide" as happening to the Zionists is difficult. Not a reliable rule though, someone could use "genocide" that way I suppose. | | |
| ▲ | throwaway290 3 days ago | parent [-] | | > Zionists can't really be genocided What I see in dictionary is "rational or national group". I guess Zionism does not fall under "national group". I still think the usage is still wrong, unless you can find an example where it is used that way. In any case this thread justification of how it is okay to attack jews or israelis (or tell me it didn't happen if you have better information than me) for being jews after oct 7 and israeli government response is crazy. Like I'm Russian and I don't support Ukrainian war (by the way not the only shitty thing russian government does, see criminalization of LGBT people etc) so what now, should I be targeted and shouted at by people with signs because of something I can't change? Should I hide my rusianness? At a place I live and study at? Sure it's probably wrong/illegal to take away grants for this but if I was a student at a uni would that be a hostile environment? I kind of think so. I would say free speech must have some standard in civilized community, but since someone said that hate speech is protected on public uni campuses in US then I can say nothing. Again tell me if I am wrong and Jews were not personally attacked for being Jews after oct 7. I have a vague understanding of what happened. |
|
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | guelo 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | What about the hostile environment to the students who protested? | | |
| ▲ | throwaway290 4 days ago | parent [-] | | What about it? You tell me, I was not there. I literally posted requesting info... |
| |
| ▲ | kevinventullo 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | If you’re genuinely interested in truth, I can tell you that I personally visited the protest site at UCLA in order to get an unfiltered view or what was happening. The signage I saw was largely of the form “End Genocide” or “Divest”. There were also signs criticizing e.g. the border wall with Mexico. A lot of it was critical of Israel, as well as the United States and even the University of California, but none of it was anti-Jewish. In fact there were a few signs of the form “Jews Against Genocide”. | | |
| ▲ | throwaway290 3 days ago | parent [-] | | Thanks for data point. So if this is what they take away grants for then yeah it's not a good look... |
|
|
|
|
