Sigh. Her job is not her right to free speech.
2 Likes
I’m going to keep repeating it until you acknowledge it. And I’ll try to rephrase since evidently my first few attempts weren’t as clear as I believed they were and I consider you a poster who argues in good faith.
Things I am NOT saying:
-Kathleen Stock was fired.
-Lefty students broke the law.
-Lefty students are attempting to overthrow the government.
-Lefty students don’t have the right to protest.
-Lefty students can’t ask for illegal things.
Things I AM saying:
-Lefty students called for Kathleen Stock to be fired.
-Kathleen Stock was on the faculty of a public university.
-Firing someone from a post at a public university on the basis of expressing an unpopular opinion violates the principle of free speech. (It might also violate UK law, but I’ve been pretty guarded in my comments about that because I am not an expert on freedom of speech in the UK, other than to say it is a thing that exists.)
-Demanding or asking or expecting or even wishing that a faculty member of a public university be fired for making unpopular statements is demonstrating a hatred of free speech.
1 Like
You’ve made this point, but I am saying I disagree with it. I don’t see how you’ve demonstrated their hatred, a very bold statement to make about someone else’s intentions, in any of your posts.
Filing a $100MM civil rights lawsuit knowing you’ll get a small fraction of that isn’t done for greed, or a lack of understanding of how the laws work, or anything else, it’s done to draw attention, make headlines, start conversations, start to make change. I don’t see this movement as any different. They did something theatrical, probably at some point realizing that what they were asking for was never going to happen, to draw attention to their cause because they had no other recourse.
So what would you have done if you were a student in that situation and felt what they felt?
So, the hinge here is that it is a public university? If she was at a private university or business would their calling for her to be fired be a hatred of free speech?
It’s hard for me to imagine a scenario where publicly “demanding” that a person’s civil rights be violated could be an acceptable course of action.
I am more of the Evelyn Beatrice Hall school of thought: “I disapprove of what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”
Except I’m a wimp, so I’m not sure I’d actually “defend to the death”.
If I don’t like what people say I will argue with them and challenge them on it if I am interacting with them directly, or I will point out why they are wrong if I am discussing with others.
I think they could denounce her message and make a reasoned argument for why they think she is wrong.
I do not respect their “theatrical act” and I think publicly calling for her firing IS demonstrating a hatred of her right to free speech, even if they knew the firing was not going to happen (which I am not completely convinced they did, but is somewhat irrelevant IMO).
And the fact that the police felt her safety was in question leads me to believe that they were doing a lot more than “theatrical acts”.
1 Like
Private employers may fire anyone for almost any reason (except an illegal one like “we discovered you’re Muslim” if they are not religious) or no reason at all. Freedom of speech does not apply.
If they were calling for the firing of a private university professor then I would say they are demonstrating a hatred of academic freedom.
To be clear, the people protesting Kathleen Stock / demanding that she be fired are ALSO demonstrating a hatred of academic freedom.
That’s a lesser sin, but still a sin, IMO.
1 Like
I’d call it more like a disagreement with the fact that Free Speech applies to everyone no matter what they say (noted exceptions excepted).
I blame the University for failing its students. Proper reply is to rebut. Once emboldened that their feels can actually effect change, who knows what else their feels will accomplish? Perhaps elect a Prime Minister!!
So the students hate free speech because they did not recognize the public/private difference with regard to the university they attend. Ok.
1 Like
I disagree with your last two opinions.
1 Like
I think it’s comparable to the January 6th protests (not riots). They were protesting for a completely illegal response from then-VP Mike Pence to overturn the election, effectively demonstrating a “hatred” for democracy. And some of them went so far as to act on it, which is where the line was crossed there.
But the ability to speak (and only speak) in favor for something that basically amounts to treason ought to be protected, even though following through on that call to action would itself be treasonous. Doesn’t make the theatre treasonous. And I wouldn’t even say those folks hate democracy. They just wanted a platform. Well, most of them, anyway.
Yeah, I pointed out that Sussex was a public university in my first post in this thread. I think it’s very relevant.
And any who were actually students at Sussex were well aware that it’s a public university. There are only five private universities in all of the United Kingdom.
Ok.
What Freedom of Speech expression would you find so vile that you would join a public protest asking for a Professor’s removal from their job at a public university?
For example, instead of Transphobic comments/views, they said something along the lines “Hitler was right the Jews were destroying the world and still are because Hitler wasn’t allowed to exterminate them all, Britain should have sided with Germany” That’s pretty much as hateful a free speech statement you can make and I don’t think anyone would say someone hates free speech for asking that such a person making such statements be fired.
The students asking for her removal just have a different line than you.
1 Like
I think defining a public university as “the government” in this context makes virtually zero sense. The principal is very clearly freedom from government overreach of authority via imprisonment or some other means of silencing an opinion. This is an employer/employee relationship, not a governmental authority/citizen relationship, and her ability to express her opinion in a public manner has not been infringed.
That’s pretty problematic imo.
Isn’t the concept of “public” vs “private” universities different in the UK than in the US?
You can’t change the world
But you can change the facts
And when you change the facts
You change points of view
If you change points of view
You may change a vote
And when you change a vote
You may change the world
1 Like
No, I would argue against the speech itself… not that the professor should be fired.
2 Likes
This is a pretty core premise of advocating free speech. Let the shitty speech be brought down by sunlight, not hidden from it.
3 Likes
Perhaps, but a subject for a different thread.