MU and diversity of thought

[rocket surgeon]

I'm sure McAdams will still be spending his days responding to every comment on the articles.

By the way, I love that the article says they won't share the name of the incoming student for obvious reasons, but then shares the full name of the student that brought the concerns forward, to go along with screenshots of a number of her social media accounts.  Good stuff.

you are sure are ya?

it has already been pointed out what the article says and does not say about the identities of each

your screen name sure is provocative-do a search on susan rosenberg and assata shakur sometime.   if you stand by your blm name after that, MU should call you into their office...just to make sure everything is alright.

[brewcity77]

your screen name sure is provocative-do a search on susan rosenberg and assata shakur sometime.   if you stand by your blm name after that, MU should call you into their office...just to make sure everything is alright.

I suppose I shouldn't be surprised the activists you cite haven't been significantly active in 40 years. FYI, while it is the 20s, it's not the 1920s.

[rocket surgeon]

I suppose I shouldn't be surprised the activists you cite haven't been significantly active in 40 years. FYI, while it is the 20s, it's not the 1920s.

you didn't follow my assignment very well-assasta has been hiding in cuba and rosenberg is one of the big fundraisers for blm.  she's probably trying very hard not to violate the conditions of her pardon from billy bob after serving only 16 of 50 some year term.  huh, she had some "alleged" involvement in the killing of police...weird

[brewcity77]

you didn't follow my assignment very well-assasta has been hiding in cuba and rosenberg is one of the big fundraisers for blm.  she's probably trying very hard not to violate the conditions of her pardon from billy bob after serving only 16 of 50 some year term.  huh, she had some "alleged" involvement in the killing of police...weird

Your inability to comprehend why wades has BLM as his username is willful ignorance.

[wadesworld]

Your inability to comprehend why wades has BLM as his username is willful ignorance.

Bingo.

[Galway Eagle]

And here I thought he supported the Bureau of Land Management.

[Hards Alumni]

And here I thought he supported the Bureau of Land Management.

[wadesworld]

And here I thought he supported the Bureau of Land Management.

Accurate. That's my username. My signature is the racist, communist, Marxist organization. I support them both.

[Pakuni]

And here I thought he supported the Bureau of Land Management.

In some parts that BLM is an even scarier bogeyman.

[Lennys Tap]

I suppose I shouldn't be surprised the activists you cite haven't been significantly active in 40 years. FYI, while it is the 20s, it's not the 1920s.

1920s? Wrong Rosenberg, Brew.

[rocket surgeon]

Your inability to comprehend why wades has BLM as his username is willful ignorance.

let's just start with willful provocation, after that, it doesn't matter.  you think i hang out here 24/7 like you guys?  is willful ignorance like not succeeding at something you at first want to take on, but suck at it and don't realize it?  is that willful ignorance?

[wadesworld]

let's just start with willful provocation, after that, it doesn't matter.  you think i hang out here 24/7 like you guys?  is willful ignorance like not succeeding at something you at first want to take on, but suck at it and don't realize it?  is that willful ignorance?

What?

[brewcity77]

1920s? Wrong Rosenberg, Brew.

It was hyperbole based on the current decade. Didn't think that was necessary to explain.

[brewcity77]

let's just start with willful provocation, after that, it doesn't matter.  you think i hang out here 24/7 like you guys?  is willful ignorance like not succeeding at something you at first want to take on, but suck at it and don't realize it?  is that willful ignorance?

No, it's when something has been explained on here ad nauseum and rather than learn from any of those hundreds of current posts, you prefer references that are 40 years out of date and irrelevant to the topic at hand.

You are willfully choosing to be ignorant of the relevant information put in front of you in favor of irrelevant information that displays an ignorance of current events. That's willful ignorance.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

is willful ignorance like not succeeding at something you at first want to take on, but suck at it and don't realize it?

Like writing comprehensible sentences?

[Babybluejeans]

Why even engage with rocket? He's a relic of the past and ill-equipped to have a rational dialogue (or even a comprehensible one, for that matter). Just move on.

[vogue65]

Why diversity of thought?
Do we want diversity just for the sake of diversity?
How about clear thought?
How about informed, considered, logical, helpful, honest, mature, creative thought?

[Lennys Tap]

Why diversity of thought?
Do we want diversity just for the sake of diversity?
How about clear thought?
How about informed, considered, logical, helpful, honest, mature, creative thought?

Who are the thought police arbiters in charge of determining which thoughts (opinions) meet your criteria?

[vogue65]

Who are the thought police arbiters in charge of determining which thoughts (opinions) meet your criteria?

"Thought police" is an old trope lacking validity.  Those thoughts and opinions which meet the test of reasonableness are self evident.  People on the fringe worry about the "thought police".

Democracy is based on majority thinking, with protection for the minority.  There is no such thing as the thought police, just another boogyman.

The thought police is another clever conspiracy theory.   It is so frequently used it sounds like it is real.  Think whatever you want to think, it does not make it so, and nobody has to argue with crazy thinking.  It is what it is.

Some personalities, usually argumentative types, have to hold contrary positions about everything to feel good. 

My position is think whatever you want, no policing necessary.

[forgetful]

Who are the thought police arbiters in charge of determining which thoughts (opinions) meet your criteria?

I think this is an age old question. Should all thoughts/ideas be freely expressed? What behavior do we accept, or brandish as corrupt/illegal?

There seems to be a point at which people abandon their ideals of freedom/liberty in deference to their desire to control the actions or words of others.

The general reason, is a fear that if we do not denounce specific language/actions, people who might have an inkling to lean in that direction will also do so. So where does one draw the line?

e.g.

Ok to smoke Nicotiana tabacum: Illegal to smoke Cannabis sativa.
Ok to post pictures of male nipple: outlandish to show a female nipple.
Terrible to say unnatural carnal knowledge: Ok to say Occupy (used to have a negative sexual connotation centuries ago).

[shoothoops]

Racism is not diversity of thought:

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/10/media/tucker-carlson-writer-blake-neff/index.html

[Lennys Tap]

I think this is an age old question. Should all thoughts/ideas be freely expressed? What behavior do we accept, or brandish as corrupt/illegal?

There seems to be a point at which people abandon their ideals of freedom/liberty in deference to their desire to control the actions or words of others.

The general reason, is a fear that if we do not denounce specific language/actions, people who might have an inkling to lean in that direction will also do so. So where does one draw the line?

e.g.

Ok to smoke Nicotiana tabacum: Illegal to smoke Cannabis sativa.
Ok to post pictures of male nipple: outlandish to show a female nipple.
Terrible to say unnatural carnal knowledge: Ok to say Occupy (used to have a negative sexual connotation centuries ago).

Forgetful

Of course free societies have to regulate behavior. Behavior (murder, theft, mayhem, etc.) is an impingement on other's freedom.

Ideas? Not so much. When I was at MU, speakers from the left (Alan Ginsburg was one) were denied a podium because of the administration. Today (either because of administrations or students) universities discourage or cancel speakers from the right (Ben Shapiro, etc.). I think it was a bad idea then and I think it's a bad idea now.

[The Sultan]

Forgetful

Of course free societies have to regulate behavior. Behavior (murder, theft, mayhem, etc.) is an impingement on other's freedom.

Ideas? Not so much. When I was at MU, speakers from the left (Alan Ginsburg was one) were denied a podium because of the administration. Today (either because of administrations or students) universities discourage or cancel speakers from the right (Ben Shapiro, etc.). I think it was a bad idea then and I think it's a bad idea now.

Universities deny speakers of all types when it becomes an issue related to PR, donor relations, safety, etc.  The right has just learned how to leverage their supposed victimization. 

Believe me, I have been involved in more decisions around whether or not to let a left leaning speaker go ahead than someone from the right. 

[forgetful]

Forgetful

Of course free societies have to regulate behavior. Behavior (murder, theft, mayhem, etc.) is an impingement on other's freedom.

Ideas? Not so much. When I was at MU, speakers from the left (Alan Ginsburg was one) were denied a podium because of the administration. Today (either because of administrations or students) universities discourage or cancel speakers from the right (Ben Shapiro, etc.). I think it was a bad idea then and I think it's a bad idea now.

My example of two photos (male vs. female nipple) is regarded as speech/ideas, not behavior. But more specifically on ideas/speech:

Do you permit hate speech, or calls for violence? If so what constitutes either?

Should we allow speakers that promote Nazi'ism and "final solutions"? This is extreme, but intentionally so, because I'm trying to question/identify if there is a "line".

[vogue65]

Most of this debate is abstract legal mumbojumbo.
Stand up for what you know as right and let the chips fall.  Pathetic extreme positions are indefensable. 
Shysters, conmen, and hucksters will always be around, lots of them on MUScoop.
However, the majority of us are level headed. 
The extreme has had it's day, I remain hopeful.