I read the NYT, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, and the Atlantic everyday. I'm thoroughly disappointed in the first three. Their coverage of issues that are critically important is pathetic.
I agree that those Publications are abysmal. The Globe and Mail would probably be Canada's version of The New York Times. I ended my subscription to years ago and I've been spending the money the subscription cost me on substacks since then. And here I am, reading you instead of some peckerhead at the Globe and Mail 😂❤️
Two points of contention. 1) She should not be exonerated! Debate and disagreement should be allowed at any academic institution. But debate and disagreement should be based on facts and reason--and facts and reason can be challenged with facts and reason. Simply allowing otherwise is not acceptable in general and certainly not acceptable in a place of learning.
2) “outsized achievements and contributions” of Western people. This is absolutely false, related only to the century of the speaker. And who knows what the next century or two may bring. Egypt of 5000 bce, Mesopotamia of 500 bce, Hindu India of ???, or China unitil c. 1500 ce would not even comprehend such a statement. In 1400 ce China produced and used modern porcelain, while British kings ate their meals on plates of stale bread! There's evidence that the Aztecs and Incas, and perhaps the Mayans before them, lived better as complete populations than the Europeans who conquered them in the very late 15th-early 16th century. The European conquerors only had advantage of gunpower and horses--which were invented and domesticated in China.
For me, I cannot accept any justification for academic pretense for this lady. She's entitled to whatever opinion, even bias, she has--as a (somewhat despicable) private person. But she should expect rejection when she uses an academic position to share, to teach, opinions that have no support from acceptable facts or good reason.
"Violence is downstream from hate speech." Yeah, that's absolutely true. In Germany, I'm told, hate speech is illegal. Seems to be a reasonable and civil idea to me.
I live in Canada. We have different speech laws here. There is a category called "hate speech" and it is illegal. However... it is extremely hard to invoke and rarely results in a conviction but it does happen. Not claiming any superiority here in Canada. Plenty of racism here too. But it is qualitatively different.
Well…lots of food for thought. I can see the question of free speech being supported as well as racist (and may I add antisemitic and anti indigenous people too) comments being punished. But you know, in this day and age, Trump gave rise and permission for those statements to be made and the result has been a real uptick in violent behavior and the possibility of a government that will turn back that clock completely. I don’t think a professor should be allowed to make those kinds of racist statements. They are people in authority, people who are supposed to command respect and people who have great influence on their students. I support what the university has done. Go further, fire her.
McWhorter 's column is an example of why I say, with friends like the NYT, who needs enemies?
I read the NYT, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, and the Atlantic everyday. I'm thoroughly disappointed in the first three. Their coverage of issues that are critically important is pathetic.
I agree that those Publications are abysmal. The Globe and Mail would probably be Canada's version of The New York Times. I ended my subscription to years ago and I've been spending the money the subscription cost me on substacks since then. And here I am, reading you instead of some peckerhead at the Globe and Mail 😂❤️
"And here I am, reading you instead of some peckerhead at the Globe and Mail ."
Hahaha Geof. I'm going to just take that as one hell of a compliment and go around feeling good for the rest of the day! Thanks.
Two points of contention. 1) She should not be exonerated! Debate and disagreement should be allowed at any academic institution. But debate and disagreement should be based on facts and reason--and facts and reason can be challenged with facts and reason. Simply allowing otherwise is not acceptable in general and certainly not acceptable in a place of learning.
2) “outsized achievements and contributions” of Western people. This is absolutely false, related only to the century of the speaker. And who knows what the next century or two may bring. Egypt of 5000 bce, Mesopotamia of 500 bce, Hindu India of ???, or China unitil c. 1500 ce would not even comprehend such a statement. In 1400 ce China produced and used modern porcelain, while British kings ate their meals on plates of stale bread! There's evidence that the Aztecs and Incas, and perhaps the Mayans before them, lived better as complete populations than the Europeans who conquered them in the very late 15th-early 16th century. The European conquerors only had advantage of gunpower and horses--which were invented and domesticated in China.
For me, I cannot accept any justification for academic pretense for this lady. She's entitled to whatever opinion, even bias, she has--as a (somewhat despicable) private person. But she should expect rejection when she uses an academic position to share, to teach, opinions that have no support from acceptable facts or good reason.
Neither tenure nor free speech should be unassailable. Violence is downstream from hate speech.
"Violence is downstream from hate speech." Yeah, that's absolutely true. In Germany, I'm told, hate speech is illegal. Seems to be a reasonable and civil idea to me.
I live in Canada. We have different speech laws here. There is a category called "hate speech" and it is illegal. However... it is extremely hard to invoke and rarely results in a conviction but it does happen. Not claiming any superiority here in Canada. Plenty of racism here too. But it is qualitatively different.
Well…lots of food for thought. I can see the question of free speech being supported as well as racist (and may I add antisemitic and anti indigenous people too) comments being punished. But you know, in this day and age, Trump gave rise and permission for those statements to be made and the result has been a real uptick in violent behavior and the possibility of a government that will turn back that clock completely. I don’t think a professor should be allowed to make those kinds of racist statements. They are people in authority, people who are supposed to command respect and people who have great influence on their students. I support what the university has done. Go further, fire her.