Frownland

I believe that a school should be allowed to "silence" people who they like by not paying them to speak. Crazy, I know. I also think that with the amount of representation students are told that they have in the school, when it doesn't go with what a bulk of them like, well, that's pretty anti democratic.

Also, the bulk of all this business in terms of protest is peaceful. Some people are just so over the top with how much they hype of a few instances of violence being incurred. It's just young people being young people like every other ****ing generation, except this time around were exposed to every element more easily and quickly because of social media and all that. If it was around thirty years ago, people would be the same level of drama queen as the super anti SJW people and create threads like these galore.

__________________

Studies show that when a given norm is changed in the face of the unchanging, the remaining contradictions will parallel the truth.

Goofle

Silencing opinion is always a bad thing. Silencing one particular side of a debate is even worse, in any circumstance. Especially in learning institutions where speakers have already set up their events and paid for it.

__________________

Frownland

Using the word silencing to describe colleges not paying certain people to speak is commonly an over dramatic thing. They talk about college students being entitled, but thinking that you're guaranteed a platform regardless of what opinion you have is more entitled than not wanting a lifetime of debt.

What of science matters? Does a fringe scientist who thrives on misinformation deserve the equal time as a scientist who has an actual understanding of what the field offers? Not every side deserves representation because their bull**** can propagate really easily, it's stupid to think otherwise.

I'm noticing a lot of anti freedom of peaceful assembly in this conversation. That's a shame.

__________________

Studies show that when a given norm is changed in the face of the unchanging, the remaining contradictions will parallel the truth.

Goofle

It applies to every single person in the world mate. Racists, sexists, creationists, holocaust deniers, Islamists, Feminists, Egalitarians, Humanitarians, Scientists, Communists etc. So long as they aren't inciting violence. Why is that hard to understand?

__________________

Frownland

Is it hard to understand that colleges should not be forced to host any of those people? That's what I find to be dumb.

__________________

Studies show that when a given norm is changed in the face of the unchanging, the remaining contradictions will parallel the truth.

Goofle

They don't have to. But if the students want it, and are prepared to organise an event, they should get it in my opinion. The whims of faculty and discerning students should not quell the thought of others.

__________________

Frownland

I don't think it's a good idea to propagate bull**** and dangerous ideas.

__________________

Studies show that when a given norm is changed in the face of the unchanging, the remaining contradictions will parallel the truth.

Goofle

You clearly aren't aware of what happened to the racist BNP party after it was given air-time in the UK then. From having a semblance of power based on word of mouth and leaflets, it went to complete and utter obscurity - absolutely demolished by the free exchange of ideas.

The type of fascism you're basically advocating for should never be looked fondly upon.

__________________

Frownland

Lol you should work for a newspaper mate, that's some nice heightened language.

__________________

Studies show that when a given norm is changed in the face of the unchanging, the remaining contradictions will parallel the truth.

Goofle

Okay.

__________________