This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
Not that history isn't repeating itself in some ways, but it's a little different.
There are plenty of folks including leftists fighting with these groups at Berkeley, for one thing, and the Marxist connection is really contorted.
Having said that, I'm glad that Berkeley is Berkeley and that disputes like this can happen there.
There are plenty of folks including leftists fighting with these groups at Berkeley, for one thing, and the Marxist connection is really contorted.
Having said that, I'm glad that Berkeley is Berkeley and that disputes like this can happen there.
@Budwick As much as I'm tempted to continue with this, I'm really not sure its worth it.
Without doubt, some students and some student organizations at Berkely law school are expressing their freedom to speek by trying to limit other individuals' right to speak.
You didn't give me a frigging cite, and when I googled the terms you mentioned, the first thing I came up with was the Administration saying they didn't necessarily agree with the student organisation's votes on the issue.
The students, frankly, really can't, IMO, "defy the Constitution" because they're not state actors, and, in f-ing fact, the First Amendment says that the State can't deny their right to try speak, including speech about others right to speak.
I don't honestly know what UC's reaction to this is, other than reading a frigging Jewish adminstrator's statement that he's not comfortable with it, but my hope is that, as a public institution, it will allow this debate to go on between the various student organizations, and react, ultimately, in accord with its onw REAL First Amendment obligations as a state entity.
Without doubt, some students and some student organizations at Berkely law school are expressing their freedom to speek by trying to limit other individuals' right to speak.
You didn't give me a frigging cite, and when I googled the terms you mentioned, the first thing I came up with was the Administration saying they didn't necessarily agree with the student organisation's votes on the issue.
The students, frankly, really can't, IMO, "defy the Constitution" because they're not state actors, and, in f-ing fact, the First Amendment says that the State can't deny their right to try speak, including speech about others right to speak.
I don't honestly know what UC's reaction to this is, other than reading a frigging Jewish adminstrator's statement that he's not comfortable with it, but my hope is that, as a public institution, it will allow this debate to go on between the various student organizations, and react, ultimately, in accord with its onw REAL First Amendment obligations as a state entity.