Connect with us

Education

The real danger of quashing voices like Ben Shapiro’s on college campuses

Published

on

Why is it that so many colleges react negatively when a conservative speaker is booked to do an event on campus? It seems lately the words many college administrators dread the most are, “Young America’s Foundation has invited Ben Shapiro to speak on campus.”

It isn’t just Shapiro, but he’s conspicuous for two reasons. First, the unhinged hatred towards him is not congruous with his level of offense. Yes, he will offend people sometimes as the truth invariably does, but he’s not David Duke or Louis Farrakhan. Somehow, he’s able to stir up such positive and negative responses on college campuses that one might think President Trump himself was making an appearance.

The second reason he’s conspicuous is because his protesters don’t have valid reasons to protest him. They’re forced to pull from their own irrational fears of him that have been conjured up out of fiction. He’s a devout Jew, yet protesters call him Hitler. He’s adamantly opposed to authoritarianism, yet protesters call him a fascist. He’s one of the most targeted journalists in America by white supremacists, yet for some reason protesters seem to think he’s a white supremacist.

Gonzaga recently claimed their reason for not allowing Shapiro to speak on campus is because his speeches “routinely draw protests that include extremely divisive and hateful speech and behavior, which is offensive to many people.”

They weren’t accusing him of being offensive, which colleges often cite when rejecting speakers like Suzanne Venker or Milo Yiannopoulos. Instead, they were accusing him of drawing protests that were offensive. Let that sink in for a moment. Here’s a speaker that a good chunk of any college campus wants to hear and a bigger chunk needs to hear, but he’s being quashed because of the protests that rise up when he speaks. I’m not going to go into a long rant about mob rule. Either you see it in play here or you don’t.

Commentators, particularly conservative ones, often discuss how colleges have a problem with free speech. Colleges often counter by having “free speech zones” or their polar opposite, the much maligned “safe space.” They might hold free speech events before cancelling them over someone’s… speech. Hmm.

But here’s the problem with framing the issue in this way. First, it adds to confusion about what free speech is and isn’t. The 1st Amendment, which is the first thing that comes to mind when people invoke “free speech,” has very little to do with what’s happening on college campuses. Our Constitutional right to free speech is a protection against government suppressing speech for unlawful reasons. What’s happening on college campuses is different. Now, thanks to the ugly protests that have been following conservative speakers, private AND public colleges can invoke safety concerns whenever a heavily protested speaker is planning on coming to campus. The progressive puppetmasters have known this for decades. That’s why they spark the protests in the first place. It’s a dirty little secret the organizers of these protests will never mention. By allowing their protests to turn violent, they set the precedent by which universities can turn away controversial conservative speakers. It’s not spontaneous in most instances. It’s done by design.

The second reason we shouldn’t frame the issue as one about freedom of speech is because we can debate all day about it, but the best we can hope for is a logical victory that does nothing to change the situation. We shouldn’t allow the left to drive the narrative within the futile debate over free speech. Instead, we need to address the core issue, which is the systematic quashing of free thinking.

If you read the introduction page of any college in America, they all claim to nurture free thinking among their students, but this is absolutely false. They only nurture thoughts that align with their progressive agendas. Students are free to think whatever thoughts are approved of within these leftist echo chambers. Progressives are free to do or say their heart’s desires and their worldviews are reinforced by their treatment as students. Meanwhile, conservatives must persevere through their college experience with hopes they won’t succumb to the sustained festival of leftist indoctrination they’re forced to immerse themselves in while they work towards getting their degrees.

Freedom of thought is a nebulous concept because it’s often difficult to recognize attempts to suppress thought. We can easily recognize when the freedom of expression is being suppressed because it’s enforced through rules. However, suppressing freedom of thought is done through absence. Meteorology students aren’t told it’s against the rules to be skeptical of proposed methods to reverse man-made climate change. They’re simply never shown any research that runs contrary to the “settled science” that embraces Al Gore’s politics over actual scientific debate. Students are told that socialism can be effective if the greed of the elite can be eliminated, yet every failed attempt to institute socialism is categorized as a false attempt. This is why students leave college thinking that socialism has never been tried. Legitimate contradictions to Darwinian evolution are never discussed. Once again, it’s “settled science.” If ever a student brings up evidence that points to intelligent design, they’re either told that given enough time, nature can accomplish anything, or they’re fed the multiverse theory. Either way, the challenging evidence is dismissed as settled, debunked, and let’s get back to looking at chimp DNA.

The same process is applied to conservative speakers. Rather than allow the discussion, university administrators have grown so accustomed to controlling every aspect of their indoctrination centers that they’re preference is to prevent these thoughts from making an appearance at their schools. They are ill-prepared to win the debate, so they suppress the debate before it can occur. Even those that allow conservative speakers prepare their students for the unapproved thoughts they’re about to be exposed to.

When universities hamper or block conservative speakers, they’re not attacking freedom of speech. Their suppressing freedom of thought. Indoctrination is standard operating procedure at most universities today. The greatest threat to this status quo isn’t conservative speakers who might say something offensive. It’s that their students might hear something that actually makes them think.

I’m JD Rucker. Thank you for listening.

Advertisement
1 Comment

1 Comment

  1. Michael Dexter

    January 7, 2019 at 10:50 pm

    Romans 1:18-19 New American Standard Bible (NASB)
    Unbelief and Its Consequences
    18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth [a]in unrighteousness, 19 because that which is known about God is evident [b]within them; for God made it evident to them.

    Footnotes:
    Romans 1:18 Or by
    Romans 1:19 Or among
    New American Standard Bible (NASB)
    Copyright © 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1995 by The Lockman Foundation

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Education

‘Academic’ journal editor Roberto Refinetti tries to explain why they published absurd hoax papers, fails miserably

Published

on

Academic journal editor Roberto Refinetti tries to explain why they published absurd hoax papers fai

An under-reported story last year revealed multiple “academic” journals, where only the highest levels of academic thought leadership is allowed to publish, put nonsense hoax articles in their publications simply because they perpetuated radical progressive thought. These peer-reviewed journals were willing to publish utter garbage as long as the garbage smelled like the hyper-leftist garbage they normally publish anyway.

Libertarian pundit John Stossel tried to interview the editors of these prestigious journals which were hoaxed, and was only able to find one willing to go on camera. Roberto Refinetti from the academic journal Sexuality and Culture came on air to discuss the hoax and the problems with academic journals. But even he was unable to come up with a valid response about why these journals were so easy to fool.

Stossel read some of the reviews from “experts” in the field that were used to determine whether or not the papers should be published. When Stossel noted that one of the reviewers was an idiot, Refinetti rushed to the defense by blaming the hoaxers and said, “They made up data that he or she [the reviewer] wished he had but he didn’t, so when he sees, ‘Wow, these people did this study that I wanted to do and they got the results that I thought should be there, this is great!'”

In other words, Refinetti came to the same conclusion as the hoaxers and Stossel: Some if not most of those who review these papers make their decision based on whether or not the conclusions fit their worldview, not whether or not the papers were actually correct.

This is just one of many examples of why leftist academia, which is the vast majority of all academia, operates with the sole goal of reinforcing their biases rather than informing students or giving the education system proper facts about the world.

Will you help revive the American Conservative Movement?

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Conservatism

Why free speech is so hated by college students

Published

on

Why free speech is so hated by college students

You’ve heard the stories. Free speech isn’t actually a thing on college campuses around the country. There seems to be certain types of protected speech, such as anything that embraces the leftist narrative of these progressive indoctrination centers, but any views that are considered to be too conservative for the delicate eyes or ears of college students are quickly stifled.

But it’s not just the administrators, professors, and other far-left employees of the colleges. The students themselves are opting out of free speech willingly. Sure, they’d probably complain if anyone intruded on their rights to espouse hyper-leftist ideologies or spew out progressive talking points, but that won’t happen. Why? Because those who may be opposed to their ideas are the same people who embrace limited government, free speech, and our rights as Americans. Therefore, the people who have an incentive to quash leftist notions are the very people who are against quashing anyone’s notions at all.

It’s a conundrum for conservatives because the same courtesy is not paid to them. Free speech (or any of our rights, for that matter) is neither appreciated nor sacred to leftists. So we’re stuck trying to protect our own rights to free speech while defending the left’s rights to the same. Meanwhile, they don’t have to defend their right to free speech because nobody’s trying to deny them of this right, but they’re busy trying to prevent any conservative ideas from seeping through to the collective conscious of their precious university environment.

This video by Campus Reform shows leftist students doing everything they can to prevent conservative ideas from being seen, let alone appreciated. This is important to them to stop ideas from being observed and potentially discussed, but they believe the reason they do it is to stop “hate speech.” The definition of “hate speech” on college campuses throughout America has become anything that’s contrary to their own progressive philosophy. Therein lies the real reason free speech is so hated.

We appreciate everything Campus Reform and their parent organization does. We strive to deliver strong conservative perspectives for college students as well, which is why we remain a crowdfunded publication powered by donations of our readers. The only way to stop the censorship of conservative ideas on college campuses is to continue to spread the word. We have reality on our side, so the more we push the message, the easier it will be to break through their indoctrinated defense shields.

The bottom line for college leftists is deep down, they realize their arguments are wrong. Their only defense against thoughtful conservative perspectives is to prevent as many people as possible from hearing them. Why? Because they have no defense against the truth.

Will you help revive the American Conservative Movement?

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Education

Matt Walsh on his new Lamborghini and the student debt issue

Published

on

Matt Walsh on his new Lamborghini and the student debt issue

Over normally not a fan of modern day parables. Biblical parables are so impressive, it makes our attempt today seem weak 99 times out of 100. Matt Walsh presented the parable of the Lamborghini today and it’s worth noting.

He framed it nicely in his article, “I Bought A Lamborghini But Now I Don’t Want To Pay For It. I Demand Lamborghini Loan Forgiveness.

As I propose — no, I demand — Lamborghini loan forgiveness. It is simply unfair that I have saddled myself with this unspeakable financial burden. It is the worst injustice I have ever perpetrated against myself, and I demand restitution. I don’t really care how the matter is resolved, just as long as it ends with me cruising debt-free down the highway in my bright yellow Lambo. Yes, I will be keeping the car. I’m not asking for a refund here — I’m talking about forgiveness. The debt should be wiped clean. Like it never happened. Poof. Gone.

The moral of the story is a condemnation against the privileged folks coming out of college who now believe they shouldn’t have dp pay back their student loans. Personal responsibility got our decisions used to be a hallmark of American exceptionalism. But between poor parenting, leftist propaganda, and of course good ol’ fashioned progressive indoctrination in American universities, many students are buying into the notion that the obligation they agreed to when they first went to college should be forcibly forgiven.

Democrats are latching onto this idea, as expected, by crying alongside the snowflakes and offering to forgive the debt. It’s not that they’ve earned the right or they’ve been wronged by someone who took advantage of their goodwill. They signed up for expensive colleges knowing they should have to pay back the loans, yet more they’re pretending like they were somehow made a victim.

Student debt isn’t the crisis that it’s being framed as by Democrats. It’s a bribe to get people who made poor choices in their youth to vote Democrat for the sake of financial gain. Of course, the resulting skyrocketing college prices isn’t their problem.

Will you help revive the American Conservative Movement?

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending

Copyright © 2019 NOQ Report