NYT: Trump Says He Will Sign Free Speech Order for College Campuses

Deaths and harm? How does letting someone have speech result in death? Actually forcing groups to the fringes of society and not giving them an outlet to vent and voice their opinions will make them more radical, extreme, and violent. Speech serves to alleviate that and will result in less violence. Also you strawmanned. I support the right of all of those people and those actions under the free speech clause in our Constitution. Go ahead and burn a flag or say offensive things. Kneel to boost your profile if you are an inferior NFL player all you want. All of those things are free speech as long as they do not go as far to incite violence.


And before you what about this, I will go ahead and stop you. I know your retort will be that letting KKK and other hateful people talk is bad and that in itself is enough to "incite violence" but it isn't actually the same thing. The Supreme Court already established this in Brandenberg V Ohio, stating that "The Court held that government cannot punish inflammatory speech unless that speech is "directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action." A KKK rally, which is your pet example, doesn't de facto meet that. Burning a flag, while enough to maybe provoke someone, isn't enough. Having a person say a hateful thing about certain groups, isn't enough. If you want free speech, you're gonna have to put up with some assholes.

​

 

Many people have been killed by the KKK and Neo Nazis over the years as recently as Charlottesville. I understand you are sympathetic to their rights to spread and grow their group - but is a college campus the right place to recruit into hate groups?

A college campus is a place to encourage exchange of positive ideas, not a place to intimidate students. Hate speech doesn't belong on a college campus - giving a voice to White Nationalism and groups like ISIS is just stupid. What do you think these groups do with members they recruit??? Sit around and knit sweaters????

 

Actually I hold zero sympathy for their growth and do not believe that any group has a right to grow. That is a strawman argument if I have ever seen one. I am consistent in the application of my principles and that means those hate groups, including black supremecist groups as well, have the right to free speech.

Now your argument also fails to prove there is imminent danger from simply allowing free speech. The criminal actions of one person don't matter in a legal sense in regard to Constitutionally protected speech.

Furthermore, a college campus is not only a place for a positive exchange. That may be your idea but it certainly doesn't matter according to our established laws and legal precedents. Universities are a place where ideas should be challenged and discovered and ideas that you may not agree with have the right to compete on the open market place of ideas. These ideas of hate will lose when allowed to flow freely, because sunlight is the best disinfectant. Oppressing them only gives them a victim status and makes them more extreme.

 

Why would you allow the KKK to recruit on a college campus???

Why is it that a private university isn't allowed to control who speaks on its campus but is able to force students to take theology classes?

And why is it that a private organization like the NFL is allowed to control speech of its players then? The NFL also benefits from the federal gov't, should they also be required to allow free speech?

 

I kind of agree with this - the faculty part.

School is a place of education. The free exchange of ideas is important for education. As a student, I wouldn't want any students to be limited in speech, or any faculty. But at the same time, I want no outsiders, especially those that aren't there for educational reasons, to cause issues with the study body having an education. If you want a voice, be a genuine part of the study body or faculty.

 

No one is simply "letting" anyone speak and it is not that you are letting the KKK specifically. You simply are not restricting anyone's right to free speech under the freedom of speech clause in the Bill of Rights. It isn't under anyone's authority to be letting someone speak when it concerns the God given rights of man protected by the Bill of Rights. No one is "letting" them speak because this isn't some monarchy or totalitarian state where we are subjects. We are free citizens, including those ******* KKK scumbags or the crazed members of black supremecist groups.

Also private institutions can do whatever the hell they want. I am talking about public spaces specifically, such as those at a public university.

And the football thing is going a bit off the topic of campus speech, but kneeling is protected speech as well. I am sure there are seperate legalities involved with the kneeling issues and the intersection of private business into the matter.

Explain to me how someone can claim to be the arbiter of what is allowed and isn't, concerning speech occuring in public that falls under the free speech clause and fails to incite immenent violence in accordance with an established Supreme Court precedent?

 

Depends, I think, on what this supposed Exec Order would say. It would be one thing to require universities receiving federal funds to not discriminate on the content of speech when providing reasonable accommodation of requests from the university community for a forum to speak. It is another thing to require universities to proactively protect such speakers from protest. And it sounded like Trump was talking about the latter. The former is reasonable, I think, and easy to accommodate. But to withhold funds because a school failed to protect a conservative from getting punched on the street or because they failed to stop students from chanting over speakers -- that's too much to ask of a private institution. I'd also say it probably hurts the government's interest to set that standard. The government is using these research institutions as the operational arm of its R&D goals. It might put itself in a spot where it has to deny funding for important work that it wants done, and hurt American innovation. You want to put that at stake so Milo can troll college kids?

 

What are you talking about - public universities already accommodate pretty much any nut case. Trump is trying to pressure private universities from restricting who can speak on campus. So Satan groups would be able to go to Catholic schools and preach as well as recruit. It makes no sense. Why should the federal gov't get involved in the university system and interfere in campus activities. It's so stupid and moronic. Free speech is alive and well. All of these guys have plenty of places to speak and have their voice heard without disrupting the education of students.

 

Private schools can refuse accepting govt funding. Aren't they private anyway? Really no problem at all.

 

Article on "Conservatives in the Academy."

Affirmative action for conservative professors is neither in the cards nor would it be desirable. But much can be accomplished by the administrators and faculty who are willing to muster a little courage. They can create an atmosphere in which conservatives feel confident about articulating their views, which should be subject to the same degree of scrutiny as anyone else’s.
​

https://www.commentarymagazine.com/culture-civilization/education/conservative-in-the-academy/

Spoiler: NewRoxFan bias alert™

 

So will every corporation that gets goodies from the gov't or any individual that gets a tax credit or anyone who gets benefits from the gov't also be required to tolerate hate speech?

 

According to Trump, the NFL gets massive tax breaks from the federal gov't. Therefore, he should pass an executive order allowing players to kneel during the anthem.

See that's what I can't stand about you right-wingers. You only care about things like free speech when it's mean to protect right-wingers and those who hate on liberals, women, minorities, gays, etc. But as soon as it involves kneeling or flag burnings, you guys run back to your safe space.

 

I can't believe so many people liked this post when history literally proves otherwise.


As for this issue, I'm very surprised that conservatives are for government telling private institutions how they should run their private institutions or they will take away funding. I can't imagine Obama being able to pull this off without hearing the screeching from the right about Socialism.

What's even odder is how bold he is about it, that he's protecting conservatives free speech, and that a lot of these incidents, as @fchowd0311 mentions...are spammed across social media, some of them lies. Like this Hayden Williams thing, which was twisted into somehow a free speech debate.

This idea that free speech means you have a right to ANY platform is insane. If you are denied speaking at a private university there's a ton of ways to get your message out. You have no right to the biggest platforms, you have a right to protest, you have a right to create your own platform, but you don't have a right to anyone else's.

EDIT: I will add that the right better hope that the next Democratic president doesn't use Trump as an excuse to pull off similar things. I could see a liberal president going after religious schools and the funding they receive from the government.

 

History doesn't prove otherwise, as we have progressed in a positive direction over time thanks to enlightenment ideals.

Also I guess they aren't so private if they are getting govt money. Why are we having to pay for them? I would like funding pulled regardless and put toward bringing the price of state universities down for the common man.

 

Well, it's called strings. Nothing new bud. I don't support corporate welfare actually and would rather pull funding regardless of anything with speech.

 

How doesn't it prove otherwise? Do you think fascism is bad? So explain to me why countries are flirting with it again?

What did Russia learn after the USSR and its fall?

Why are people still discussing race realism as if it is a new idea?

How long did it take America to realize "Oh wait...those are people despite the different color of their skin..." how long did that bad idea stick around?

Ideas never die. They take a nap, they stay dormant for a little bit until some charismatic man or woman finds some good use for them. You think that Germany didn't know what they were doing was bad? They knew. This was Germany 1900s, not 3,000 BC.

And we are talking about bad ideas striving... privatizing everything does. not. work. To just privatize school and let the free market handle it is a terrible idea since the goal of the free market is to make money. Government funding means schools can focus on what their goal should be and that's educating the future of this country. It's not a coincidence that America is now majorly lagging behind in education as we continue to privatize our education system as other countries move the opposite direction and find better results...but we have the American right ready to privatize every single thing as if it is some big cure-all.

Again, this doesn't change the point of my argument.

People do not have the right to a platform. That's basically what everyone here is saying. That Milo has a right to any platform he seeks and if he doesn't get it then he's being denied his free speech. I disagree. He has no right to any platform.