Dog Brothers Public Forum

HOME | PUBLIC FORUM | MEMBERS FORUM | INSTRUCTORS FORUM | TRIBE FORUM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
April 29, 2017, 04:31:14 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the Dog Brothers Public Forum.
101884 Posts in 2376 Topics by 1089 Members
Latest Member: Sarge
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  Dog Brothers Public Forum
|-+  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities
| |-+  Politics & Religion
| | |-+  social justice wars , SJW warriors, gender warriors , victimhood
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] Print
Author Topic: social justice wars , SJW warriors, gender warriors , victimhood  (Read 3002 times)
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 6926


« Reply #50 on: February 21, 2017, 08:39:08 PM »

CBC congressman is suing to keep the picture of the demeaning painting of police hanging in the Capital building.

Meanwhile children are dying in the streets by the thousands but this fool thinks he is making some sort of point here:

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/2017/02/21/congressman-sues-architect-of-capitol-over-removal-of-controversial-cop-painting/
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 6926


« Reply #51 on: February 25, 2017, 05:59:53 PM »

Quote from W's daughter :

"Bush told Richards during their lunch interview, “It’s crazy and sad to think that health care is a polarizing issue.” She went on to say that the young people in her organization are able to “work on social change” at “Planned Parenthood and other exceptional organizations.”

Golly I never thought of that.  I simply cannot imagine that something that cost 3.35 trillion in the US in 2016 could be subject  to any  dispute:
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/new-peak-us-health-care-spending-10345-per-person/



**************GWB Daughter Barbara Bush to Keynote Planned Parenthood Fundraiser

by DR. SUSAN BERRY25 Feb 2017963
SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER


Former President George W. Bush’s daughter, Barbara Pierce Bush, will deliver the keynote address at a Planned Parenthood fundraiser in North Texas.
Bush, the CEO and co-founder of Global Health Corps (GHC), is headlining Planned Parenthood of Greater Texas’s 2017 Fort Worth luncheon, reports the Texas Tribune:


“We believe that every person has the right to live a healthy, dignified life,” GHC says in its mission statement. “We also believe that everyone has a role to play in advancing social justice through the health equity movement.”

Bush, 34, joined with her twin sister, Jenna Bush Hager, and others to found GHC in 2009. The organization says its main concern is that “access to healthcare that exists today between the world’s rich and the world’s poor is unjust and unsustainable.”

Speaker sponsors for the fundraiser for the abortion chain’s Greater Texas affiliate will pay $20,000, while Platinum and Gold Sponsors will pay $10,000 and $5,000, respectively.

As Breitbart News reported in June of 2016, the New York Times interviewed Bush and Planned Parenthood’s president, Cecile Richards, as they lunched at the Gotham Bar and Grill.

“Can I say how impressive Barbara is?” Richards complimented Bush. “It’s one thing to work at a 100-year-old organization like Planned Parenthood, trying to shift the boat into the 21st century. But it’s another to say: ‘I see a problem, and I’m going to start an organization to fix it.’”

Bush explained her motivation to form her organization.

“Since I was born, in 1981, we’ve had the drugs to save the millions of kids around the world who die every year,” she said. “Yet the number of deaths hasn’t dropped at all. We have the tools to keep people healthy, but the systems are broken.”

Richards commiserated with her: “It’s the same in reproductive health. We have the technology. But it’s not enough unless there’s public policy that supports getting women access to care.”

Richards is the daughter of the late Gov. Ann Richards (D) of Texas, who eventually lost to Bush’s father, Republican President George W. Bush, when he ran for governor of Texas in 1994.

One of the main connections Richards and Bush have is Hillary Clinton.

Planned Parenthood and the abortion industry endorsed Clinton in her bid for the White House in 2016. Clinton said unborn babies have no constitutional rights and that, if elected president, she would work to have the Hyde Amendment repealed so that taxpayer funds could be used for abortions – an outcome that would have been an obvious boost for the abortion business.

GHC provides opportunities for young people to “work on the frontlines of the fight for global health equity” and offers paid fellowships for them with various “placement” organizations, among them Planned Parenthood Global. Additionally, GHC has provided “placements” at the Clinton Development Initiative, the Clinton Health Access Initiative, and the Clinton Health Matters Initiative – all of which are part of the Clinton Foundation.

Peter Schweizer’s book Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich details the vast amounts of money that have flowed to both Bill and Hillary Clinton through their foundation from corporations and nations seeking favorable treatment from them.

In August of 2013, Bush said she hoped Clinton would run for president because she is “unbelievably accomplished.”

Bush told Richards during their lunch interview, “It’s crazy and sad to think that health care is a polarizing issue.” She went on to say that the young people in her organization are able to “work on social change” at “Planned Parenthood and other exceptional organizations.”*******
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 39852


« Reply #52 on: February 26, 2017, 08:43:18 AM »

Health Care a much better thread for that--  $10K per head?!?  DAMN!!! 

Please post it in Health Care.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 39852


« Reply #53 on: February 27, 2017, 11:02:33 AM »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iKcWu0tsiZM&feature=youtu.be
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 6926


« Reply #54 on: March 01, 2017, 10:00:46 AM »

https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2017/02/and-the-oscar-goes-to-identity-politics

 wink
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 39852


« Reply #55 on: March 06, 2017, 05:39:01 AM »

http://www.aei.org/publication/reflections-on-the-revolution-in-middlebury/?utm_source=paramount&utm_medium=email&utm_content=AEITODAY&utm_campaign=030617
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 14521


« Reply #56 on: March 12, 2017, 02:59:19 PM »

http://thedeclination.com/marxism-the-bug-wearing-an-edgar-suit/

Marxism: the Bug Wearing an Edgar Suit

by Dystopic | Mar 10, 2017 | Culture War, SJWs, Socialism | 44 comments

In the movie Men In Black, there’s a scene where an abusive farmer gets killed by the villain, some kind of giant alien cockroach. The alien then possesses his body and walks around in comic fashion, like some kind of rotting zombie. The farmer’s wife exclaims “like an Edgar suit.”
560db22fe14e951aea89980b21a9c598

This is pretty much what Worldcon looks like, these days.

Social Justice Marxists operate in the same manner. They take over institutions, groups, corporations, movements, whatever… and kill them. They then wear the skin of the destroyed, rotting institution like an Edgar suit, ambling around in comic fashion, expecting to be treated as if they were still the institution itself.

Only unlike the movie, there are a great many of these alien bugs on Earth. They are legion. And the thing is, most rightists suspect this is true, because the Edgar suit doesn’t act like Edgar. He acts like an alien cockroach. But they nonetheless give the benefit of the doubt, because they aren’t sure.

It is in that space of uncertainty that Marxism is permitted to spread, and infest every sizable organization. Once infected, forget bringing the organization back to life. It’s a rotting husk. It’s dead. You aren’t going to take it back, and even supposing you did, it’d still be a rotting sack of skin.

I think this is the greatest weakness of the political right. We permit Marxism to spread because we are not confident in our assessment that the people in question are Marxists. Most of them deny it, of course.

I remember when one leftist kept posting about how the border wall was racist, and how illegal immigrants ought to be able to come over, and how stopping them was bad. When I asked him why he was for open borders he denied it. Yet, his chosen policy would result in a de facto open border! Was he really that delusional… or was he a Marxist trying to say “I’m not a Marxist”?

One of the ways to tell if it’s really Edgar, or just an Edgar suit, is to prod the person with absolutes. Marxists are absolutists. A case in point. Another individual explained to me that healthcare ought to be a human right. Every human should have it upon need. I pointed out the usual inefficiencies of government bureaucracy, the long waiting lists, the poor quality of VA care, and the general lack of innovation and creativity in government-run healthcare.

The thing is, the guy agreed with me on many of those things. But he countered with “but if you don’t make it a right, somebody might not get the care they need, and I just can’t support that.” It doesn’t matter if the care would be better for 99.9% of everyone else. If one single person went without needed care, he would judge it a failure.

You see this kind of argument from Marxists all the time. You could destroy entire countries with mass immigration, but if one refugee child suffered, then too bad, too sad. You must do it. Get used to British citizens speaking Arabic, you racist.

It’s the same kind of argument you hear from gun control advocates.”If it saves the life of just one child,” they will say, “it will all be worth it.” Or, “even one shooting is too many.” Marxist absolutism, again. Somebody is wearing an Edgar suit.

MADD is a great case in point. Originally founded to combat drunk driving, an honorable pursuit, the founder wound up leaving a few years later, because the organization had become a group of tyrannical neo-prohibitionists, not merely a group concerned with reducing drunk driving offenses. Soon it was receiving government money, advocating for Traffic Safety Funds (more government cash), and arguing for everything from a rash of checkpoints, to mandatory interlock devices on all automobiles — not just those owned by those convicted of alcohol-related offenses.

MADD is an Edgar suit. Scratch the surface, and you’ll find a bunch of Marxists.

The thing is, if Marxists were open about their Marxism, that is to say if the giant alien cockroach were seen as a giant alien cockroach, every normie on the planet would be trying to squash it. It you saw the bodies of the Stalin regime, the starvation of Mao’s regime, the killings of Pol Pot… you would want to stamp this thing out with every fiber of your being.
Bug

Charming fellow, right?

But when attacked, when someone starts to suspect an organization is full of Marxists, they retreat into the Edgar suit. Hi. I’m Edgar. Nice to meet you. And my goal is just to try and help reduce drunk driving deaths!

Do you know why Marxists like absolutism so much? Why even a 99.9% success rate is not good enough for them? Because it gives them an excuse to continue to exist. No human society will ever reach 100% of anything. There will always be people who are poor, people who don’t get the care they need, people who die senselessly, idiots who get drunk and wreck someone’s life. Always.

Reducing the incidence of those things is a good and noble pursuit. But they can never be stopped completely. By saying that nothing is good enough unless it has a 100% success rate, the Marxist is giving himself power for life, and his organization power forever. Because so long as one person slips through the cracks, he can say “my work is not done yet.”

But the single-minded focus of Marxists on power politics is a good tell. Absolutism can tell you if someone is a Marxist, but so can an over-reliance on the language of political power. Normal people might talk politics for a while, even rant about it as I do here, but there are also times when they just don’t care about politics at all.

Marxists want to bring politics into everything. Are you eating a plate of Chinese takeout? Cultural Appropriation. Do you drive a nice car? Privilege! Do you like your hair a certain way? Racism! Everything must involve politics with them. They cannot stop thinking about their obsession for even the briefest of moments. At some point, a normie is likely to talk about his dog, or his kid, or how much he likes beer, or something totally unrelated to politics. The Marxist, on the other hand, will find a way to steer that back.

Another Edgar Suit tell is an obsession with personal bias. Like the 100% success rate demands, the Marxist demands absolute objectivity on the part of others (while displaying none himself). Unless you can demonstrate proof of moral perfection and a completely unbiased, objective viewpoint, you can be dismissed because you’re biased. The data underlying it is irrelevant, because the collector is biased. For instance, if you said that black people in the United States committed a greater per capita share of violent crimes than white people, that is a true statement. The Marxist would say that you are biased against black people, thus your conclusion (whatever it may be) can be dismissed on that basis. Forget the facts.

The same standard, of course, is never applied to them. But again, it makes an impossible demand so that a permanent political bludgeon is created, which they can beat you over the head with constantly.

There are probably many more such tells (if you’ve got one, drop it in the comments), but those are the ones I’ve seen most frequently, and most obviously. And it’s very important to identify which groups and institutions are SJW-converged, which ones are Edgar suits filled with Marxist cockroaches, and which ones are not. Rightists have permitted bad actors to continue to be treated like good actors merely because they skinned an organization of good actors alive, and wore them like a suit. It’s both stupid, and disservice to the memory of those who created the original, non-converged organization.
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 6926


« Reply #57 on: March 13, 2017, 07:43:34 AM »

Not sure I understand the explanation for the observations he notes but a discussion of US corporate liberal mindedness.  I think he is saying the corporate leaders simply like to control the rest of us and seem to think what is best for them and their view of the world makes it ok to subject us to submit to their financial, celebrity, media and political power:

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/445705/corporate-leaders-progressive-activists
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 6926


« Reply #58 on: March 13, 2017, 08:36:24 AM »

Next it will be mirrors:

https://heatst.com/culture-wars/carleton-university-removes-weight-scale-from-gym-after-students-call-it-triggering/

 rolleyes
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 39852


« Reply #59 on: March 13, 2017, 09:44:46 PM »

 rolleyes rolleyes rolleyes
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 14521


« Reply #60 on: March 13, 2017, 10:35:57 PM »


Weight is like gender. If you identify as a slender person, of course you are one.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 39852


« Reply #61 on: March 14, 2017, 01:23:14 AM »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJyQpRfaGnw
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 6926


« Reply #62 on: March 14, 2017, 06:59:31 AM »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4NhrnCu9RM    evil
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 6926


« Reply #63 on: March 14, 2017, 08:06:45 AM »

I submit Royal jerks is best:

http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/31649/

I nominate Al Franken and Amy Klobuchar for the title of "royal" jerks
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 8698


« Reply #64 on: March 14, 2017, 09:06:34 AM »

I submit Royal jerks is best:
http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/31649/
I nominate Al Franken and Amy Klobuchar for the title of "royal" jerks

Yes, those two are as close as we will find to genderless.

My alma mater will get no discretionary money from me, just the 250/qtr I already gave them and a billion a year in taxes.  No more.

The public university was not good enough for these elites.  Klobuchar went to Yale, Franken went to Harvard.  Neither wanted to study social justice with common folk.
« Last Edit: March 14, 2017, 09:17:15 AM by DougMacG » Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 39852


« Reply #65 on: March 16, 2017, 06:15:44 PM »

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2017/03/16/ideological-odd-couple-robert-george-and-cornel-west-issue-joint-statement-against#.WMqiDfwg15R.facebook
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 39852


« Reply #66 on: March 19, 2017, 10:48:13 PM »

I remember giving to his anti-KKK campaign, but stopped when I saw what he was , , ,

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2017/03/19/the_hate_group_that_incited_the_middlebury_melee_133377.html
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 39852


« Reply #67 on: March 30, 2017, 12:07:13 PM »

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/03/white_social_justice_warrior_dies_at_hands_of_black_killer_.html#.WN0f7bwoEBx.facebook
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 39852


« Reply #68 on: March 31, 2017, 08:26:02 PM »

Jonathan Haidt on the Cultural Roots of Campus Rage
An unorthodox professor explains the ‘new religion’ that drives the intolerance and violence at places like Middlebury and Berkeley.
Opinion Journal Video: Associate Book Review Editor Bari Weiss on her interview with New York University psychologist Jonathan Hait. Photo: Ken Fallin
By Bari Weiss
Updated March 31, 2017 7:27 p.m. ET
61 COMMENTS

New York

When a mob at Vermont’s Middlebury College shut down a speech by social scientist Charles Murray a few weeks ago, most of us saw it as another instance of campus illiberalism. Jonathan Haidt saw something more—a ritual carried out by adherents of what he calls a “new religion,” an auto-da-fé against a heretic for a violation of orthodoxy.

“The great majority of college students want to learn. They’re perfectly reasonable, and they’re uncomfortable with a lot of what’s going on,” Mr. Haidt, a psychologist and professor of ethical leadership at New York University’s Stern School of Business, tells me during a recent visit to his office. “But on each campus there are some true believers who have reoriented their lives around the fight against evil.”
–– ADVERTISEMENT ––

These believers are transforming the campus from a citadel of intellectual freedom into a holy space—where white privilege has replaced original sin, the transgressions of class and race and gender are confessed not to priests but to “the community,” victim groups are worshiped like gods, and the sinned-against are supplicated with “safe spaces” and “trigger warnings.”

The fundamentalists may be few, Mr. Haidt says, but they are “very intimidating” since they wield the threat of public shame. On some campuses, “they’ve been given the heckler’s veto, and are often granted it by an administration who won’t stand up to them either.”

All this has become something of a preoccupation for the 53-year-old Mr. Haidt. A longtime liberal—he ran a gun-control group as an undergraduate at Yale—he admits he “had never encountered conservative ideas” until his mid-40s. The research into moral psychology that became his 2012 book, “The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion,” exposed him to other ways of seeing the world; he now calls himself a centrist.
Paul Gigot says there is a clear disconnect between Wisconsin and New York City.

In 2015 he founded Heterodox Academy, which describes itself as “a politically diverse group of social scientists, natural scientists, humanists, and other scholars” concerned about “the loss or lack of ‘viewpoint diversity’ ” on campuses. As Mr. Haidt puts it to me: “When a system loses all its diversity, weird things begin to happen.”

Having studied religions across cultures and classes, Mr. Haidt says it is entirely natural for humans to create “quasireligious” experiences out of seemingly secular activities. Take sports. We wear particular colors, gather as a tribe, and cheer for our team. Even atheists sometimes pray for the Steelers to beat the Patriots.

It’s all “fun and generally harmless,” maybe even healthy, Mr. Haidt says, until it tips into violence—as in British soccer hooliganism. “What we’re beginning to see now at Berkeley and at Middlebury hints that this [campus] religion has the potential to turn violent,” Mr. Haidt says. “The attack on the professor at Middlebury really frightened people,” he adds, referring to political scientist Allison Stanger, who wound up in a neck brace after protesters assaulted her as she left the venue.

The Berkeley episode Mr. Haidt mentions illustrates the Orwellian aspect of campus orthodoxy. A scheduled February appearance by right-wing provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos prompted masked agitators to throw Molotov cocktails, smash windows, hurl rocks at police, and ultimately cause $100,000 worth of damage. The student newspaper ran an op-ed justifying the rioting under the headline “Violence helped ensure safety of students.” Read that twice.

Mr. Haidt can explain. Students like the op-ed author “are armed with a set of concepts and words that do not mean what you think they mean,” he says. “People older than 30 think that ‘violence’ generally involves some sort of physical threat or harm. But as students are using the word today, ‘violence’ is words that have a negative effect on members of the sacred victim groups. And so even silence can be violence.” It follows that if offensive speech is “violence,” then actual violence can be a form of self-defense.

Down the hall from Mr. Haidt’s office, I noticed a poster advertising a “bias response hotline” students can call “to report an experience of bias, discrimination or harassment.” I joke that NYU seems to have its own version of the morality police in Islamic countries like Saudi Arabia. “It’s like East Germany,” Mr. Haidt replies—with students, at least some of them, playing the part of the Stasi.

How did we get here, and what can be done? On the first question, Mr. Haidt points to a braided set of causes. There’s the rise in political polarization, which is related to the relatively recent “political purification of the universities.” While the academy has leaned left since at least the 1920s, Mr. Haidt says “it was always just a lean.” Beginning in the early 1990s, as the professors of the Greatest Generation retired, it became a full-on tilt.

“Now there are no more conservative voices on the faculty or administration,” he says, exaggerating only a little. Heterodox Academy cites research showing that the ratio of left to right professors in 1995 was 2 to 1. Now it is 5 to 1.

The left, meanwhile, has undergone an ideological transformation. A generation ago, social justice was understood as equality of treatment and opportunity: “If gay people don’t have to right to marry and you organize a protest to apply pressure to get them that right, that’s justice,” Mr. Haidt says. “If black people are getting discriminated against in hiring and you fight that, that’s justice.”

Today justice means equal outcomes. “There are two ideas now in the academic left that weren’t there 10 years ago,” he says. “One is that everyone is racist because of unconscious bias, and the other is that everything is racist because of systemic racism.” That makes justice impossible to achieve: “When you cross that line into insisting if there’s not equal outcomes then some people and some institutions and some systems are racist, sexist, then you’re setting yourself up for eternal conflict and injustice.”

Perhaps most troubling, Mr. Haidt cites the new protectiveness in child-rearing over the past few decades. Historically, American children were left to their own devices and had to learn to deal with bullies. Today’s parents, out of compassion, handle it for them. “By the time students get to college they have much, much less experience with unpleasant social encounters, or even being insulted, excluded or marginalized,” Mr. Haidt says. “They expect there will be some adult, some authority, to rectify things.”

Combine that with the universities’ shift to a “customer is always right” mind-set. Add in social media. Suddenly it’s “very, very easy to bring mobs together,” Mr. Haidt says, and make “people very afraid to stand out or stand up for what they think is right.” Students and professors know, he adds, that “if you step out of line at all, you will be called a racist, sexist or homophobe. In fact it’s gotten so bad out there that there’s a new term—‘ophobophobia,’ which is the fear of being called x-ophobic.”

That fear runs deep—including in Mr. Haidt. When I ask him about how political homogeneity on campus informs the understanding of so-called rape culture, he clams up: “I can’t talk about that.” The topic of sexual assault—along with Islam—is too sensitive.

It’s a painfully ironic answer from a man dedicating his career to free thought and speech. But choosing his battles doesn’t mean Mr. Haidt is unwilling to fight. And he’s finding allies across the political spectrum.

Heterodox Academy’s membership has grown to some 600, up about 100 since the beginning of March. “In the wake of the Middlebury protests and violence, we’re seeing a lot of liberal-left professors standing up against illiberal-left professors and students,” Mr. Haidt says. Less than a fifth of the organization’s members identify as “right/conservative”; most are centrists, liberals or progressives.

Balancing those numbers by giving academic jobs and tenure to outspoken libertarians and conservatives seems like the most effective way to change the campus culture, if only by signaling to self-censoring students that dissent is acceptable. But for now Heterodox Academy is taking a more modest approach, focusing on three initiatives.

The first is its college guide: a ranking by viewpoint diversity of America’s top 150 campuses. The goal is to create market pressure and put administrators on notice. The University of Chicago currently ranks No. 1—rising seniors, take note.

The second is a “fearless speech index,” a web-based questionnaire that allows students and professors to express how comfortable they feel speaking out on sensitive subjects. Right now, Mr. Haidt says, there are a tremendous number of anecdotes but no real data; the index aims to remedy that.

The third is the “viewpoint diversity experience,” a six-step online lesson in the virtue and practice of open-minded engagement with opposing ideas.

Heterodox Academy is not the only sliver of light. Following the Middlebury incident, the unlikely duo of Democratic Socialist Cornel West and conservative Robert P. George published a statement denouncing “campus illiberalism” and calling for “truth seeking, democracy and freedom of thought and expression.” More than 2,500 scholars and other intellectuals have signed it. At Northwestern the student government became the first in the country to pass a resolution calling for academic freedom and viewpoint diversity.

“What I think is happening,” Mr. Haidt says, is that “as the visible absurdity on campus mounts and mounts, and as public opinion turns more strongly against universities—and especially as the line of violence is crossed—we are having more and more people standing up saying, ‘Enough is enough. I’m opposed to this.’ ” Let’s hope.

If you’re not a student or professor, why should you care about snowflakes in their igloos? Because, Mr. Haidt argues, what happens on campus affects the “health of our nation.” Ideological and political homogeneity endangers the quality of social-science research, which informs public policy. “Understanding the impacts of immigration, understanding the causes of poverty—these are all absolutely vital,” he says. “If there’s an atmosphere of intimidation around politicized issues, it clearly influences the research.”

Today’s college students also are tomorrow’s leaders—and employees. Companies are already encountering problems with recent graduates unprepared for the challenges of the workplace. “Work requires a certain amount of toughness,” Mr. Haidt says. “Colleges that prepare students to expect a frictionless environment where there are bureaucratic procedures and adult authorities to rectify conflict are very poorly prepared for the workplace. So we can expect a lot more litigation in the coming few years.”

If you lean left—even if you adhere to the campus orthodoxy, or to certain elements of it—you might consider how the failure to respect pluralism puts your own convictions at risk of a backlash. “People are sick and tired of being called racist for innocent things they’ve said or done,” Mr. Haidt observes. “The response to being called a racist unfairly is never to say, ‘Gee, what did I do that led to me being called this? I should be more careful.’ The response is almost always, ‘[Expletive] you!’ ”

He offers this real-world example: “I think that the ‘deplorables’ comment could well have changed the course of human history.”

Ms. Weiss is an associate book review editor at the Journal.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 39852


« Reply #69 on: April 11, 2017, 09:40:53 AM »

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-silencing-of-heather-mac-donald-1491866320
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 6926


« Reply #70 on: April 11, 2017, 07:36:09 PM »

I dunno. I must be the only one who while sympathetic to this guy who was picked randomly to leave the plane after paying and boarding also wonders why he refuses to cooperate with airport security.
I have been bumped on flights before and while furious I didn't refuse to cooperate.

now the SJW turning this into police brutality and asian lives matter.  And this guy who was using his medical license to sell drugs then becomes a professional poker player is now in the hospital for a few days ?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/united-airlines-police-violence_us_58ecd450e4b0c89f912166c1?
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 39852


« Reply #71 on: April 17, 2017, 04:49:40 AM »



http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/news/a54564/the-violent-clashes-in-berkeley-werent-pro-trump-versus-anti-trump/
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 39852


« Reply #72 on: April 17, 2017, 05:49:12 AM »

http://thewellesleynews.com/2017/04/12/free-speech-is-not-violated-at-wellesley/
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 14521


« Reply #73 on: April 17, 2017, 02:32:53 PM »


The group's leader, Nathan Damigo, who was convicted in 2007 for pointing a gun at and and robbing a Muslim cab driver he believed to be Iraqi, made his presence known on Saturday. He was caught on video sucker punching a small, female-presenting anti-fascist protester in the face.

Why discriminate? We all know gender is just a construct, right? Perhaps the puncher was also female-presenting at that moment.


The left being upset at the lack of civility is like a guy who murders his parents and then asks for the court's mercy because he was an orphan.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 39852


« Reply #74 on: April 19, 2017, 12:43:22 AM »

http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/07/f-the-police-protesters-stop-blue-lives-matter-speech/?utm_campaign=atdailycaller&utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=Social
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 39852


« Reply #75 on: April 25, 2017, 03:06:30 PM »

http://www.dailywire.com/news/15686/college-president-considers-punishing-conservative-hank-berrien?utm_source=shapironewsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_content=042017-news-title&utm_campaign=two
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 39852


« Reply #76 on: April 25, 2017, 03:50:29 PM »

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/04/25/uc-berkeley-riots-violence-looms-as-mayor-questioned-over-ties-to-extremist-group.html
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!