OSU President Tells PC Protesters Not To Let The Screen Door Whack 'Em On The Ass On The Way Out
At The New Criterion (via the philosophymetametametablog (a place for thoughtcrime))
The written account of the incident is more satisfying than the actual video in which the VP waffles a bit and, worse, uses the PCs own bullshit rhetorical tactics against them, claiming that people working in the building are afraid. TNC applauds this as a clever tactical move...but I disagree. I think it's, rather, just a cheap, convenient argument. To make it clever and satisfying rhetorically, the VP would have to point out to the protesters that he's using their own criteria against them: anyone who says they're afraid counts as afraid, and no reasonable person test can undermine such claims. It's pretty amazing to see the incredulous reaction among the protesters...but, sadly, the substantive point is lost on them: their own bullshit criterion is bullshit. As would have been obvious to anyone capable of even a modicum of objectivity. But, even faced with their own argument, and their own honest reaction thereto, the point seems completely lost on them. The cult of PC has robbed them of their ability to think about what they are doing even a little bit.
Now, perhaps the protesters do have a right to be there...I'm not sure. I'd think that prohibiting them from taking over rooms in administrative buildings would be an instance of ordinary time, place and manner restrictions on free speech...but IANAL, of course. At any rate, I have no position on whether they should be chased out of the building. What's really gratifying--or would be, without the faux fear-mongering--is Michael Drake's complete rejection of the "demands."
The written account of the incident is more satisfying than the actual video in which the VP waffles a bit and, worse, uses the PCs own bullshit rhetorical tactics against them, claiming that people working in the building are afraid. TNC applauds this as a clever tactical move...but I disagree. I think it's, rather, just a cheap, convenient argument. To make it clever and satisfying rhetorically, the VP would have to point out to the protesters that he's using their own criteria against them: anyone who says they're afraid counts as afraid, and no reasonable person test can undermine such claims. It's pretty amazing to see the incredulous reaction among the protesters...but, sadly, the substantive point is lost on them: their own bullshit criterion is bullshit. As would have been obvious to anyone capable of even a modicum of objectivity. But, even faced with their own argument, and their own honest reaction thereto, the point seems completely lost on them. The cult of PC has robbed them of their ability to think about what they are doing even a little bit.
Now, perhaps the protesters do have a right to be there...I'm not sure. I'd think that prohibiting them from taking over rooms in administrative buildings would be an instance of ordinary time, place and manner restrictions on free speech...but IANAL, of course. At any rate, I have no position on whether they should be chased out of the building. What's really gratifying--or would be, without the faux fear-mongering--is Michael Drake's complete rejection of the "demands."
posted by Winston Smith at
8:50 AM
2 Comments:
Also, I never got the whole frat (and sorority) thing either. Seemed like an excuse to spend a lot of money, waste time and get drunk. It became a moot point on my campus sophomore year (many years ago in this galaxy). The frats and sororities were caught hazing in my freshman year, some people got seriously hurt and were put on probation. Did the same stuff sophomore year and were banned completely. People could join but not affiliated at all with the campus, no activities on campus, etc...it took them over 25 years to re-earn that affiliation. I was personally disappointed when it happened.
Oops, sorry, left it on the wrong post.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home