Daily Archives: March 7, 2017

Jose Cuervo’s Apocalyptic Vision Encourages Hedonism 03/08/2017 – MediaPost Communications

Posted: March 7, 2017 at 10:06 pm

Given the apocalyptic tone of the real news these days, Jose Cuervos new campaign, Tomorrow Is Overrated, could turn out to be positively prescient.

Lets hope not. But its certainly a direct, if tongue-in-cheek, attempt to tap into Americans current fears and need for an occasional release like a shot of no-nonsense liquor, ideally in the context of a madly romantic moment.

The brand describes the creative as seeking to resurrect the original intensity of tequila by celebrating Cuervos historic disregard for anything but celebrating the moment as contrasted with other tequilas focus on refinement and conformity.

advertisement

advertisement

But Kevin Jones, chief creative officer of Cuervos agency of record, Crispin Porter + Bogusky LA, cuts to the chase: This campaign bluntly points out that whatever awaits us tomorrow might not be that great of a reason to miss out the fun you could be having tonight, he says. And with all the uncertainty there is in the world now, this message seems particularly relevant.

The campaigns centerpieces are a two-minute video (below) and a 60-second TV spot adapted from it.

Directed by Ringan Ledwidge known for unnerving films like Gone and Voodoo in My Blood, as well as ads for Nike (Winner Stays) and Planters (Planters Holiday Party) the video depicts a handful of people who are in a bar out West somewhere when an announcement comes over the television: The end of civilization is upon us. Hold your loved ones close.

As a powerful wind (nuclear firestorm?) blows fellow citizens past the bars windows, one handsome, be-jeaned dude puts Elviss Its Now or Never on the juke box and makes like Astaire with the woman nearest him. (Luckily, shes gorgeous, in an unpretentious, cow-gal kinda way.)

Other watering hole denizens are inspired to follow suit and enjoy Cuervo shots relishing the moment even as the roof blows off and the end is nigh.

Read the original here:

Jose Cuervo's Apocalyptic Vision Encourages Hedonism 03/08/2017 - MediaPost Communications

Posted in Hedonism | Comments Off on Jose Cuervo’s Apocalyptic Vision Encourages Hedonism 03/08/2017 – MediaPost Communications

The Gooch Palms are a handful of hedonism – Mandurah Mail

Posted: at 10:06 pm

On a quick jaunt away from tearing up American stages, Australia's favourite "s**t-pop" band, the Gooch Palms, arrive in Mandurah on March 10 to blow away Hooch punters.

Heres an idea: think about how many bands there are. The ones you know, the ones youve heard about. Now think about how many of those bands do something different. Really different. Possibly get-naked-on-stage different.

The Gooch Palms are one of those bands, and their weird and wacky take on musical performance built largely on on-stage stunts, bright colours and the aforementioned nudity. At this point, its only done them favours.

I dont remember the last time we stopped, Gooch Palms frontman Leroy Macqueen said.

At this point, its felt like two years since weve had any meaningful break. Weve probably clocked up close to 400 shows in the last two years.

Thats a pretty crazy number for any band, but for the Gooch Palms, its par for the course. The two piece partners Macqueen and Kat Friend, the symbioticparing somehow manifesting more energy than most full-size bands have a very definite, and much-loved, aesthetic.

Describing themselves as Australias pre-eminent s**t-pop band, Gooch Palms stage sets, video clips and all-around appearance drips novelty.

But this is only, really, the facade on what is a well-oiled machine; Macqueen and Friend live the Gooch Palms, the entire ship being steered by their ever-creative minds.

The release of their second LP, the revealingly-titledIntroverted Extroverts, also saw the formation of their own label imprint, as well as their shot at the stages of the US.

The first album we did, we made in nine hours in our front room, Maqueen said.

I dont wanna say it was half-arsed, but it was definitelypretty off the cuff. So going into a studio, with an actual engineer, was a huge change for us.

We had started building a bit of a base by that point, so we wanted to make something that reflected who we are, and what it is we do at our shows, which is basically have fun above anything else. It was definitely everything we wanted from the second album.

The jump to American audiences seems like a given for Australian bands these days, but it arguably makes more sense for the Gooch Palms: their raucous sets basically built around Friends pounding drum beats, Maqueens riffs from a crotch-covering guitar, and both of their anthemic calls to action, or to party, or to sit around in the living room seem tailor made for US audiences.

They love it, they eat it up, Maqueen said.

I mean, if you show initiative and passion in what youre doing, audiences will respond anywhere. You cant be lazy about it; youve gotta show the fans that youre as into being there as they are.

Originally posted here:

The Gooch Palms are a handful of hedonism - Mandurah Mail

Posted in Hedonism | Comments Off on The Gooch Palms are a handful of hedonism – Mandurah Mail

Is Democracy Dying Before Our Eyes In America? OpEd – Eurasia Review

Posted: at 10:05 pm

By Emanuel L. Paparella, Ph.D.*

Eternal Vigilance is the Price of Freedom Thomas Jefferson

And at the end they go crazy Giambattista Vico

John Adams, the second president of the United States, did a study on the life of Republics from their inception all the way to the 18th century. To his great surprise, he discovered that they all died, sooner or later. In other words, they were mortal. The ones who lasted longer were what he calls republics of virtue.

By republic of virtue Adams meant a polity based on the rule of law, concern for the common good of the whole polity, rationality, justice, personal virtues such as courage, honesty, sobriety, wisdom, harmony, enterprise, magnanimity. These were the virtues as enunciated by the ancient Greeks ethical treatises, considered essential components of personal as well as collective well-being.

Rome could also function as an example of that stance toward republicanism, at least at the beginning. That may explain why it lasted so long, some 500 years as a Republic based on democratic principles of peoples representation via the Senate. It was built on a solid political foundation.

But as that other great observer of republicanism in Roman history, Giambattista Vico, well observed, it too eventually succumbed to the process of an historical law wherein republican polities begin with a basis in necessity and a need to survive (the poetical era of the gods), continue with a basis in utility based on prosperity (the era of the heroes), and finally, as he puts it, they become corrupt with abundance and luxury and they go mad (the era of men) The process of madness comes in the third and final cycle. Then the process repeats itself and from extreme rationalism there is a gradual return to the poetical.

That is to say, at the end republics manage to destroy themselves. The destruction happens interiorly, with the corruption of the essential moral core of the republic based on virtue. And this was the second great surprise to Adams: they did not succumb to external invasions by fierce enemies; they committed suicide.

The best example of that sad situation is to be found in Roman history in the reign of Caligula which was the culmination of imperial corruption. Prominent on stage, at that time, there was a deranged emperor sitting on top of a pyramid of power which had lost even the memory of its virtuous republican heritage.

He was a vindictive sort of fellow and thought of himself as a magnificent god before whom his subjects had to kneel in adoration, even when he presented himself naked in every respect, especially the moral sense. Few dared shout that the emperor is naked. In effect, the Romans had become sychophantic narcissistic idolaters worshipping themselves. Caligula was the supreme representation of that narcissistic idolatry. Rome worshipped itself as a goddess. It was nothing less than the beginning of the end.

Enter Thomas Jefferson: he agreed with Adams that virtue was essential but added that it was also important to keep up ones guard and not sleep on ones laurels, so to speak, and not take the democratic system, as brilliant as it might be, too much for granted. That too can be corrupted. Hence he coined the famous dictum: Eternal vigilance is the price of freedom.

When Jefferson counseled eternal vigilance he did not mean the installment of a powerful invincible army buttressed by state-of-the-arts weapons that would keep the peace world-wide (the pax Americana, similar to the pax Romana), but the preservation of the virtues on which the republic had been built: its democracy, its checks and balances, its freedom of speech, its Constitutional guarantees, its bill of rights, its freedom of religion. Unless those were preserved, Democracy would eventually turn into a shamble of sorts. Democracy can be powerful in a military sense, but to remain a democracy, its foundations cannot be based on sheer power, in a Machiavellian mode, so familiar to European nationalism, but on virtue as the Greeks and early Romans understood it.

Lets now briefly look at the present situation. The parallels between Trump and Caligula are uncanny. Undoubtedly we still have all the trappings of democracy in America: three branches of government, elections, congress, executive, judicial, constitutional guarantees of human and political rights, free unfettered debates.

All this in theory. In practice we have an electorate of which 50% and more does not bother to vote; of the other 50% approximately 25% have opted to vote for a madman who has somehow managed to become a president by the subversion of democracy even if never won the popular vote (which he lost by 3 million votes). He won mostly by electoral college count and, most importantly, by harnessing the help of an undemocratic foreign power run by authoritarian oligarchs, Putin at the forefront. That remains to be investigated.

To be perfectly truthful and frank, the whole process was rigged and fraudulent. Had Congress insisted on the revelation of Trumps tax returns, as all other modern presidents had done, his financial connections with Russia, going back 30 years, would have come to the surface and would have revealed malfeasance and corruption. He has no intention of doing so, and the Republican controlled Congress has no intention, so far, to demand the disclosure; which in effect means that they are in on the malfeasance.

This illegitimate president reigning like Caligula and demanding constant adulation, has so far fooled some 40% of the electorate by making it look like populism: he feigns to be for the people and by the people. In reality he has surrounded himself with fat cats who are beginning to show their bias for tax cuts for the rich and diminishment of social benefits for the poor and middle class, not excluding their health insurance. This is in process as we speak.

Behind the scene, pulling the strings, there is his strategist Steve Bannon, who is in possessions an historical theory of clash of civilizations and white supremacy. His allies are those who believe that there is an alternate government at work (consisting mostly of Intelligence agencies) which they call deep alternate government.

It stand to reason that the enemy would be perceived to be intelligence agencies, globalization in any shape or form, the liberal media, and, by default, genuine democracy itself. And that is exactly what we have been witnessing for the last few weeks. Few pundits and media experts have shouted the Emperor is naked.

The allies, on the other hand, are perceived to be white supremacist authoritarian fascist-leaning nations like Russia or Hungary who have little use for democracy and social justice. Its all grab what you can for yourself, at the personal and collective level and to hell with democracy.

We have now reached the sorry stage when some 30% of Americans have more sympathy for Russia than for our traditional allies in the European Union. The same people continue deluding themselves that they live in a thriving democracy. I suppose derangement is like a disease: it spreads exponentially.

So the urgent question resurfaces: are we witnessing the beginning of the end of American and Western democracy as we know it? Will Jeffersons dictum come back to haunt us when America and the EU will have destroyed themselves by destroying their own principles and ideals? Indeed, Jefferson had in on target: eternal vigilance is the price of freedom.

Let me end with a modest proposal. The Romans had in place a system of emergency in case of a political disaster. It was the equivalent of desperate measures to confront desperate situations, like a Hannibal, for example. We should install such a measure, democratically installed and approved, of course: when the republic is in mortal danger, and it is discovered that a national election was rigged and fraudulent, it should be declare null and void and the citizens be invited to return to the urns and vote again, this time in a legal and fair mode. Any takers? Let those who have ears, let them hear.

About the author: *Professor Paparella has earned a Ph.D. in Italian Humanism, with a dissertation on the philosopher of history Giambattista Vico, from Yale University. He is a scholar interested in current relevant philosophical, political and cultural issues; the author of numerous essays and books on the EU cultural identity among which A New Europe in search of its Soul, and Europa: An Idea and a Journey. Presently he teaches philosophy and humanities at Barry University, Miami, Florida. He is a prolific writer and has written hundreds of essays for both traditional academic and on-line magazines among which Metanexus and Ovi. One of his current works in progress is a book dealing with the issue of cultural identity within the phenomenon of the neo-immigrant exhibited by an international global economy strong on positivism and utilitarianism and weak on humanism and ideals.

Source: This article was published at Modern Diplomacy.

The Modern Diplomacy is a leading European opinion maker - not a pure news-switchboard. Todays world does not need yet another avalanche of (disheartened and decontextualized) information, it needs shared experience and honestly told opinion. Determined to voice and empower, to argue but not to impose, the MD does not rigidly guard its narrative. Contrary to the majority of media-houses and news platforms, the MD is open to everyone coming with the firm and fair, constructive and foresighted argumentation.

Read the original:

Is Democracy Dying Before Our Eyes In America? OpEd - Eurasia Review

Posted in Rationalism | Comments Off on Is Democracy Dying Before Our Eyes In America? OpEd – Eurasia Review

UMaine System considering new free speech policy – Press Herald

Posted: at 10:04 pm

Amid increasing anti-Muslim and anti-immigrant tensions nationwide, the University of Maine System is considering a new free speech policy that would affirm constitutionally protected speech, but also would allow campus officials to prohibit speech that harasses others.

The executive committee of the board of trustees will discuss and vote on the proposed changes at a meeting Wednesday.

This is a timely issue as many universities nationally have been and are facing questions about campus climate and civility, according to the narrative accompanying the suggested changes.

The policy is based in part on the findings of the University of Chicago Report of the Committee on Freedom of Expression, and the model language suggested by that committee.

One of the biggest differences between the UMS and Chicago language is that the model language has a strongly worded and lengthy defense of free speech, with a narrow section spelling out the exemptions. The UMS policy uses the Chicago exemption language almost verbatim and has a more limited description defending all speech. The final section of the UMS policy says this policy shall not be construed or applied to restrict academic freedom within the University, nor to restrict constitutionally protected speech.

In December, the trustees directed an ad hoc committee chaired by Chancellor James Page to consider whether changes were needed to policies regarding free speech and expression, campus climate, and political impartiality. Also on the committee were trustees James Erwin and Gregory Johnson, University of Southern Maine President Glenn Cummings, UMaine Machias Interim President Sue Huseman and general counsel James Thelen.

Read the original here:
UMaine System considering new free speech policy - Press Herald

Posted in Free Speech | Comments Off on UMaine System considering new free speech policy – Press Herald

NY Times supports free speech but blames right for ‘narrative’ about progressive campus culture – Hot Air

Posted: at 10:04 pm

posted at 5:01 pm on March 7, 2017 by John Sexton

There is a lot to like about the New York Times editorial on the silencing of free speech that took place recently at Middlebury college, but there is also a problem. Midway through, the Times inserts a paragraph suggesting the incident is part of a right-wing narrative aimed at unfairly blaming progressives, rather than an example of a genuine problem with progressive culture on and off campus.The editorial starts well enough with this accurate, if somewhat bloodless, account of the incident at Middlebury:

Truth would lose something by their silence, Mill wrote, even if their views go against the entire world, and the entire world is right.

Persuasive words. But not last Thursday in an auditorium at Middlebury, where a student recited that very quotation in introducing the notorious social scientist Charles Murray. Moments later caterwauling erupted, and the event collapsed into a night of turned backs, shouted chants, pounding fists and one wrenched neck belonging to a professor who was supposed to have provided a counterpoint to Mr. Murrays remarks, and to lead the Q. and A., but instead was attacked while leaving with him.

As I noted yesterday, political science professor Allison Stanger, who is a Democrat, wrote of the moment students began shouting her and Murray down, I saw some of my faculty colleagues who had publicly acknowledged that they had not read anything Dr. Murray had written join the effort to shut down the lecture. Speaking of her effort to exit the building later she wrote, we confronted an angry mob and added, I noticed signs with expletives and my name on them. On the moment when she was grabbed by the hair and shoved violently, Stanger writes, I feared for my life. She later went to the ER and was given a neck brace.

Eventually, the NY Times does condemn all of this in no uncertain terms. Free speech is a sacred right, and it needs protecting, now more than ever. Middleburys president, Laurie Patton, did this admirably, in defending Mr. Murrays invitation and delivering a public apology to him that Middleburys thoughtless agitators should have delivered themselves, the editorial states. Unfortunately, before it reaches that conclusion, the Times felt it was necessary to insert a paragraph suggesting the whole story is part of a bogus right-wing narrative:

Though speakers of all ideologies regularly appear at colleges without incident, a few widely publicized disruptions feed a narrative of leftist enclaves of millennial snowflakes refusing to abide ideas they disagree with. From the president to Fox News, right-wing voices wail, through their megaphones, about how put upon they are, like soccer players collapsing to the turf and writhing in pretend agony.

What the Times is describing with this sports analogy is whats usually called a flop, i.e. a player faking an injury in order to draw a foul on the other team. Clearly, that doesnt apply to the incident at Middlebury College. So where does it apply? Is the Times referring to a similar mob that shut down a speech by Milo Yiannopoulis at Berkeley? If so, the editorial writers should take a look at a first-hand account by a student reporter who was at Berkeley that night. Heres a bit of what he wrotein the NY Times last month:

Until Wednesday, I never felt in danger during a protest. Around 7 p.m. I saw a huddle of people yelling at one another. As more people surrounded them, a burning red truckers hat was held up on a stick. There were reports that another student wearing what appeared to be a Make America Great Again hat was severely injured.

Then I saw someone wearing all black walk up to a student wearing a suit and say, You look like a Nazi. The student was confused, but before he could reply, the black-clad person pepper-sprayed him and hit him on the back with a rod.

Doesthis sound like a flop created by conservatives to support a false narrative or does it, once again, sound like violent progressives venting their rage on people they see as a threat? The NY Times claim that these incidents are part of a bogus narrative, and not a sign of a genuine problem with progressive protesters, is absurd and ignorant. Not only are conservatives routinely mobbed when they come to campus, some schools now use the likelihood of progressive mob action as an excuse to disinvite them.

Last October, PEN America, a group devoted to preserving the freedom of written expression, issued a report on campus protest behavior. The report stated, a rising generation may be turning against free speech because some of its more forceful advocates have been cast as indifferent to other social justice struggles. The PEN report did not agree with the NY Times that having conservative voices shut out of campus was part of a fake narrative. On the contrary, it suggested there was a real danger to allowing mob action to become an implied threat to speech:

The assassins vetothe ability of those willing to resort to violence to determine what speech can be heardis anathema to free speech. It cedes control to the most extreme and lawless elements. It is the responsibility of the university administration and, where necessary, local law enforcement to ensure the safety of the speaker, the audience, and protesters.

The New York Times is right about the importance of free speech. Its wrong to suggest theright has created a false narrative about this issue. In fact, these incidents keep happening because the progressive left now routinely labels speech it disagrees with as hate speech or worse still as the equivalent of violence. It seems the NY Times isnt ready to admit progressives, on campus and off, are the real cause of this problem.

See the rest here:
NY Times supports free speech but blames right for 'narrative' about progressive campus culture - Hot Air

Posted in Free Speech | Comments Off on NY Times supports free speech but blames right for ‘narrative’ about progressive campus culture – Hot Air

Free speech is more than a right – The Crimson While

Posted: at 10:04 pm

By Carter Yancey | 03/06/2017 7:02pm

CW / Kylie Cowden

It is astonishing that discussion over the extent to which free speech applies is taking place in the United States of America. The right of free expression is fundamental and absolute, just as it ought to be. Hate speech is free speech, offensive cartoons are permissible, calls to insurrection are totally legal and vile advocations of Nazism should be ignored but by no means silenced. So far, the United States Supreme Court has done a supreme job at preserving and protecting these rights. But free speech is more than just a right; it is a fundamental moral principle.

As a human being, your ability to express yourself is a necessary by-product of your right to exist; if it is denied or suppressed, your humanity itself is being compromised. It is not only necessary to protect this right from government intervention, but also to protect speakers from other citizens. Those who would advocate assault against preachers of hate or endorse the banning of trolls from social platforms are undermining one of the most necessary concepts for a civilized society to prosper. Defenders of liberty, when citing the First Amendment to speak out against such cases, are often met with a defense that goes something like: "Free speech means the government can't punish you for giving your opinion. It doesn't mean that you don't have to face the consequences of what you say." To that, I have several responses.

First of all, we need to be ever conscious about the direction legislation is taking in first world countries. Canada has already passed laws preventing a person from using speech that could be deemed offensive by others. The phrase "hate speech is not free speech" is an attack on free speech which is clearly intended to influence political action. To dismiss the defense of free speech by calling it inapplicable to the private sector is to ignore the fact that such ideas are infiltrating our political sphere. It is not an overreach to proudly invoke the Constitutional right to free speech as a defense against current events when the other side of the debate, if left to its own devices, would gladly pass laws to limit this fundamental freedom.

Secondly, a right is something that the government has an obligation to preserve, meaning it is the duty of the government to protect me from those who would try to prevent me from or attack me for speaking my mind. You cannot relieve the government from that responsibility and then accuse me of misusing the First Amendment to defend hate speech. Anyone who commits assault should be punished by law, even if the victim of the assault is a Nazi. When riots ensue and property is damaged in the heart of protesting a speaker and the government sits by idly, reminding people that free speech is a right becomes of dire importance.

But most importantly, people who say that free speech doesnt apply to the private sector are missing the point. Of course universities have the right to deny speakers a platform on their premises, and of course Twitter has the right to ban those who would harass other users from using their site. The question is not should they be allowed to do so, the question is should they do so. No honest and proud institute of education would shy away from the opportunity to discuss and dismantle ideas. Listening to your opponents does not grant them legitimacy cowering from them does. It is good for a free market to bring bad ideologies to ruin by boycotting the lectures and writings of their supporters, but the difference between a University not accepting a speaker because there is no profit to be made and prohibiting a talk because it is contrary to an established agenda is extraordinary.

Free speech is more than a legal right to be protected by the government; it is a moral necessity that every individual should be encouraged to exercise. For readers of this column, as students of a university, this idea is of particular relevance. Campuses across our country are making a habit of creating zones where students are safe from being exposed to dissenting opinions. We have seen Universities go through great lengths to prevent certain influential people from appearing on their grounds. With this in mind, students should not only be reminded that free speech is a right, but should be taught that it is inherently a good thing even when the words spoken are bad.

Carter Yancey is a sophomore majoring in computer science and mathematics. His column runs biweekly.

Go here to read the rest:
Free speech is more than a right - The Crimson While

Posted in Free Speech | Comments Off on Free speech is more than a right – The Crimson While

Turkish Referendum Has Country Trading Barbs With Germany Over Free Speech – New York Times

Posted: at 10:04 pm


New York Times
Turkish Referendum Has Country Trading Barbs With Germany Over Free Speech
New York Times
Mr. Erdogan's opponents in Germany, both Turkish and German, say the president wants to use the freedoms of Western democracy to further consolidate his anti-democratic powers at home, and they accuse him and his men of using their right to free speech ...
The Latest: Opposition: Turkish govt limits free speech too - Spokane, North Idaho News & Weather KHQ.comKHQ Right Now
How Germany accidentally gave Erdogan a boost ahead of key voteAl-Monitor

all 759 news articles »

The rest is here:
Turkish Referendum Has Country Trading Barbs With Germany Over Free Speech - New York Times

Posted in Free Speech | Comments Off on Turkish Referendum Has Country Trading Barbs With Germany Over Free Speech – New York Times

Pakistani judge threatens to shut down country’s social media over free speech ‘terrorists’ – Conservative Review

Posted: at 10:04 pm

Pakistan is no place for free speech.

A justice on Pakistans Islamabad High Court (IHC) has threatened to shut down the entirety of social media if criticism of Islams Muhammad continues, declaring these blasphemers as terrorists.

According to local reports, Justice Shaukat Aziz Siddiqi burst into tears while issuing the warning for those who apparently have taken to social media to criticize Muhammad. Siddiqi made it very clear that Pakistan would not allow for such displays of free speech.

Why is the blasphemous content present on the social media? What steps had the government taken up in this regard so far? Siddiqi asked. I submit and sacrifice myself and all what I have including my parents, my life and job to the person of Allahs messenger If the sacrilegious pages cannot be blocked, then, Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) should cease to exist, he added.

Siddiqi then took his comments a step further, arguing that social media in its entirety should be cut off for Muhammads sake.

"Each and everything can be sacrificed for the honor of Allah's Messenger. I will close entire social media, if I have to," he said.

And then came the conclusion: The justice declaring those who decide to engage in free speech as terrorists.

"I hereby declare as terrorists who commit blasphemy to the holy Prophet. the IHC justice declared.

About 75 percent of Pakistanis support the countrys blasphemy laws, which say that insulting Islam is punishable by death. This has led to massive discrimination against Christians and other religious minorities living inside Pakistan. The blasphemy edicts sometimes lead mobs to take the streets, and guaranteesviolent repercussions for those who have been deemed slanderers of Islam.

Pakistan is currently fending off a wave of jihadist terrorist attacks. In one such incident in February, a suicide bomber killed 88 people after detonating his vest at a Sufi shrine. This might lead observers to believe that such a vital issue to national security would take priority in Islamabad. Instead, the judiciary is discussing how to block what its citizens discuss on social media.

Free speech does not exist in Pakistan. And worse, the highest levels of government are accused of becoming cozy with international terrorist groups.

Pakistan was notoriously once the home base for deceased al-Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden, who set up shop in Abbottabad, located less than a mile away from a prominent Pakistani military academy. Its Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency has long been accused of collaborating with jihadist terror outfits.

Jordan Schachtel is the national security correspondent for CR. Follow him on Twitter @JordanSchachtel.

Originally posted here:
Pakistani judge threatens to shut down country's social media over free speech 'terrorists' - Conservative Review

Posted in Free Speech | Comments Off on Pakistani judge threatens to shut down country’s social media over free speech ‘terrorists’ – Conservative Review

REYNOLDS: End conspiring to stifle free speech – Asbury Park Press

Posted: at 10:04 pm

3:20 p.m. ET March 7, 2017

A University of California-Berkeley spokesman says a small group was responsible for turning protests violent when Breitbart editor Milo Yiannopoulos came to speak.(Photo: AP)

They told me if Donald Trump were elected, voices of dissent would be shut down by fascist mobs. And they were right!

At the University of California, Berkeley campus, for example, gay conservative speaker Milo Yiannopoulos had to be evacuated, and his speech canceled, because masked rioters beat people, smashed windows and started fires. Protesters threw commercial fireworks at police.

According to CNN: The violent protesters tore down metal barriers, set fires near the campus bookstore and damaged the construction site of a new dorm. One woman wearing a red Trump hat was pepper sprayed in the face while being interviewed by CNN affiliate KGO. . . . As police dispersed the crowd from campus, a remaining group of protesters moved into downtown Berkeley and smashed windows at several local banks. No arrests were made throughout the night.

According to CNN, the protests caused over $100,000 in damage.

Yiannopoulous wasnt the only victim of silencing efforts. At Marquette University, conservative speaker Ben Shapiro faced efforts by Marquette university employees to silence him.

The Young Americas Foundation obtained Facebook comments by Chrissy Nelson, a program assistant for Marquettes Center for Gender and Sexuality Studies, encouraging people at the behest of one of the directors of diversity to reserve all the seats for the hall and then not show up. The purpose of this was to take a seat away from someone who actually would go.

So students who wanted to hear a speaker with alternative views would find themselves unable to get a seat, because a university employee had made fake reservations. All, apparently, in the name of diversity.

Likewise, when conservative Gavin MacInnes (a founder of Vice.com) appeared to speak at New York University, he was met by an angry mob that forced him to cut his talk short, while a woman who identified herself as an NYU professor urged police, whom she said were protecting the Nazis by keeping the crowd away from MacInnes and his entourage, to "kick their ass instead of protecting them.

This stuff all looks terrible so bad that Democrat operative Robert Reich was reduced to blaming outside agitators for the violence, a trope that, as law professor Ann Althouse noted, has unfortunate resonance with the Jim Crow era. And President Trump even tweeted that Berkeley should lose federal funding for its inability to ensure free speech rights for everyone on its campus.

Well, the rioters may or may not have been Berkeley students as Althouse notes, since they were wearing masks, theres really no way Reich could tell but I think its safe to say that the rioting happened because they thought they could get away with it. (And with no arrests, I guess they did.) Likewise, I think that the staffers at Marquette didnt entertain any thought that what they were doing might get them punished. (Nor, as far as I can tell, have they been).

Thats because there has evolved on our campuses a culture of impunity: Misbehavior on the part of lefty activists will get winked at, even as other groups (sports teams with sexist appearance rankings, say) get raked over the coals for minor misbehavior. This double standard is of a piece with many campuses openly taking sides over the election, treating Trumps win like a terrorist attack, while investigating Trump supporters for racist allegations only to find no evidence that they had done anything except say Make America Great Again, as Babson College, a small school in Massachusetts, did.And as CNN's Marc Lamont Hill acknowledged, right-wing rioters are absent on college campuses.

Whether or not Berkeley loses its federal funding over the Milo riots (and it wont), I think its time for action to address this double standard. First, state and local law enforcement agencies need to target violent rioters who seek to silence speakers. It is a felony under federal civil rights law to conspire to deprive citizens of their constitutional rights, among which is free speech. In addition, many states have laws (generally called Klan laws) that punish people who engage in mob violence or intimidation while masked. These should be applied as well.

Second, perhaps its time to have a Title IX-style law banning discrimination according to political viewpoints on campus. Many states (including California) already have laws banning discrimination in hiring and firing based on political viewpoints. Perhaps we need a federal civil rights law providing that colleges that receive federal funds (which is pretty much all of them) can lose those funds if they discriminate against students because of their political views.

Some colleges may complain that this is federal interference in their internal affairs, but given the limited resistance theyve mounted to intrusive Title IX regulations, it will be hard to take such complaints seriously. Americas colleges and universities have a free speech problem. Its appropriate for the federal government to take action to protect the civil rights of those affected.

Glenn Reynolds is a member of USA TODAYs Board of Contributors.

Read or Share this story: http://on.app.com/2mCvuiX

See the original post here:
REYNOLDS: End conspiring to stifle free speech - Asbury Park Press

Posted in Free Speech | Comments Off on REYNOLDS: End conspiring to stifle free speech – Asbury Park Press

George Korda: UT’s microaggressions laboratory: Where free … – Knoxville News Sentinel

Posted: at 10:04 pm

George Korda, USA TODAY NETWORK - Tennessee 7:06 a.m. ET March 7, 2017

The Hill and Ayres Hall, University of Tennessee. (University of Tennessee)(Photo: UT Photo)

In light of Tennessee General Assemblys discussions about the University of Tennessees diversity programs - and a legislators wish to establish an Office of Intellectual Diversity to foster conservative speakers and thought on campus - its interesting to note that UT has a microaggressions research laboratory.

The College of Arts & Sciences microaggressions research lab studies, it says, the subtle everyday experiences of discrimination and their impact on mental and physical health outcomes.

Thus, its worth exploring how microaggressions correlate to free speech in the continuing controversy over UTs (presently defunded) Office of Diversity and Inclusion.

For several months toward the end of 2015 UTs diversity office impaled itself on self-inflicted public relations blunders. One was suggesting odd pronouns by which to address people who prefer not to be identified by the gender binary (male or female). Another recommendation was to not hold Christmas parties by that name and that religiously-themed cards potentially breach the campuss inclusion imperative. The legislature stripped $436,000 from the UT budget to defund the office for a year.

George Korda: Duncan says no to a town hall meeting, and politics over principles

George Korda: If Trumps not listening, it shouldnt be a surprise

George Korda: Five-year-olds, the presidential election, and the Pride of the Southland Band

The diversity issue is enough on legislators minds that State Sen. Joey Hensley, R-Hohenwald, offered on March 1 an amendment to this years proposed UT budget calling for $450,000 to fund a UT Office of Intellectual Diversity. The Tennessean newspaper reported it as, a move some senators suggested would encourage more people with conservative views to speak their minds.

Diversity of thought, expression, and civility are components of a look at the microaggressions lab. According to the labs website, its research focus is two-fold: gendered racial microaggressions, and racial microaggressions:

Various searches of the UT site produced no list of specific microaggressions. Therefore, microaggressions as found on the University of Cincinnati website are helpful in considering UT's potential future in this arena. The University of Cincinnati is the school from which new UT Chancellor Beverly Davenport recently arrived after serving as interim president, prior to which she was senior vice president for academic affairs and provost (in fact, her photo is still on the UC Office of Equity & Inclusion website).

What follow is an example of one of 36 racial microaggressions listed on UCs website. It is divided into theme, the actual microaggression, and the negative message supposedly sent by the microaggression.

The University of Tennessee has a research lab specifically studying microaggressions. The new chancellor came from a university that on her watch focused on such subjects. The continuing diversity conversation is driving discussion about UT and freedom of speech.

Given those factors, how do microaggressions as defined by the UT lab relate to UTs civility principles and free speech? Of UTs 10 civility and community principles, two in particular are significant in this discussion:

If microaggressions are uncivil speech or expression, and can be subtle and unintended, how can a student or faculty member possibly know what they can or mustnt say for fear of committing an act of bigotry or other type of incivility? What student comments or questions go unspoken or unasked because of this uncertainty? What faculty comments are, intended or unintended, unacceptable?

Common sense dictates that there are people who, as they turn to ask someone a question or begin to make a statement in class, will stop and ask themselves if they want to endure potentially being labeled as a racists, sexist, etc., for committing a microaggression.

Thats not diversity: its bringing about silence through intimidation, intended or unintended.

Are there insults and statements that are beyond the pale? Certainly. There are indeed people with discriminatory and even hateful attitudes. But is UT really a hotbed of student and faculty injustice? Must students and faculty wonder if their words are being scrutinized at all times for microaggressions and other uncivil behavior?

Thats a subject also worthy of study.

Diversity and inclusion isnt a one-way street. Otherwise, its not diverse, its not inclusion, and it bears little relation to freedom of speech.

(The University of Tennessee Microaggressions Research Laboratory website: https://microagressions.utk.edu).

George Korda is political analyst for WATE-TV, appearing Sundays on Tennessee This Week. He hosts State Your Case from noon 3 p.m. Sundays on WOKI-FM Newstalk 98.7. Korda is a frequent speaker and writer on political and news media subjects. He is president of Korda Communications, a public relations and communications consulting firm.

Read or Share this story: http://knoxne.ws/2mAfOg5

More:
George Korda: UT's microaggressions laboratory: Where free ... - Knoxville News Sentinel

Posted in Freedom of Speech | Comments Off on George Korda: UT’s microaggressions laboratory: Where free … – Knoxville News Sentinel