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 …
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @ProfSimonton @platanoclassics
He incited violence by calling the student group terrorists. 1969 Supreme Court case makes that explicitly clear. Academic freedom is not the same thing as free speech. You can read
@Prof_FSultana excellent article about that.2 replies 1 retweet 5 likes -
Replying to @dorothyk98 @ProfSimonton and1 reply 1 retweet 2 likes
-
Replying to @dorothyk98 @ProfSimonton and
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/ …
1 reply 1 retweet 7 likes
This is what has always frustrated me in public discussions of my own stuff. The issue was never about free speech or academic freedom, it was about violence and specifically racialized violence. Discussing free speech or academic freedom is a fascist trap & deflection.
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.