The terms of this debate are so confused, when they're not being willfully misconstrued. This op-ed about the Katz piece is not, in fact, a defense of free speech. The WSJ op-ed page is the one "policing speech." 1/6https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-speech-police-at-princeton-11594769170 …
-
-
More the question is what is Princeton's rules in regards to the incitement of violence towards students. They are not safe & b/c of where he published his piece, they are potential targets of stochastic violencehttps://www.wired.com/story/jargon-watch-rising-danger-stochastic-terrorism/ …
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
Calling a Black student group "terrorist" is outrageous and racist and increases the likelihood of violence against that group. I'm not sure it fits SCOTUS's definition of an incitement to "imminent lawless action," though, but I don't know what if anything courts have said...
-
...about the label "terrorist" in this regard.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.