The report also found students were “reluctant to speak their minds, especially on controversial political issues”, with many admitting that “they self-censor regularly, avoid certain topics entirely, and doubt their administrators would defend free expression if controversy struck”.
I would be relectant to speak my mind in that situation too. Everything is recorded and uploaded now. Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.
Universities are supposed to be a place where assumptions are challenged and discussions occur. It’s difficult to have a reasonable conversation with the current political rhetoric, but it is still distressing that this is the state at present.
There’s a theory too about how the right wing tends to pull a more emotional reaction which may make their rhetoric more convincing, which means freedom of speech isn’t exactly evenly distributed. But that’s a lot more than what belongs in a Lenny post.
Charlie Kirk spouting transphobic propaganda is not a challenging discussion. It’s just Nazi vitriol. In an academic setting 💩 like that should be analyzed and disseminated via scholarly research, not amplified.
I fully agree. I suppose that’s where I have a problem with hosting these twerps. They don’t need to be provided with a platform, and shouldn’t be permitted to buy access to the university. But what is the line, and who defends it? For example, discussing Gaza in a university forum could be a problem as well, depending on the jurisdiction. I
Charlie Kirk getting shot today probably will change the calculus on insurance for these kinds of events.
Also Republicans are such incredible chicken shits that they might all start driving around in Pope mobiles after this.
The pope mobile is too understated for them. Expect MAGA tanks.
