Free Speech and Creepy Liberalism

http://www.dissentmagazine.org/article/the-calling-academic-freedom-stanley-fish

At this point in his career, Fish is as much a legal theorist as he is an English professor (he’s been teaching in law schools since the mid-1980s), and it’s his contention in his latest book that “[ a ]cademic freedom is rhetorically strong but legally weak. Indeed, it is not at all clear that academic freedom has any substantial presence in the law.” But Versions of Academic Freedom is not, as one might expect, an attempt to strengthen the legal standing of the concept; Fish’s project is less about finding a new way to defend academic freedom than it is about defining and debunking what most working professors seem to think “academic freedom” means. On what grounds do claims for academic freedom rest? Why is it a good thing and what would academic life look like without it?

In search of an answer, Fish identifies five schools of academic freedom, “plotted on a continuum that goes from right to left.” (It’s worth pointing out that this ideological framing is Fish’s; I would argue that there are left and right versions of all of the positions he describes.) At the conservative end of the spectrum, we have the “It’s just a job” school (Fish’s own position), which holds that, “[ r ]ather than being a vocation or holy calling, higher education is a service that offers knowledge and skills to students who wish to receive them.” Thus, “academics are not free in any special sense to do anything but their jobs.” Second is the “For the common good” school—the mainstream position in the American academy today—which insists that academic freedom has special value to a democratic society; Fish traces it back to a founding document, the American Association of University Professors’ 1915 Declaration of Principles on Academic Freedom and Academic Tenure (drafted by Arthur O. Lovejoy and John Dewey, among others). Third is the “Academic exceptionalism or uncommon beings” school, which essentially treats academics as an elite class with special privileges. Fourth is the “Academic freedom as critique” school, which finds the real value of the academy in the “ruthless criticism of everything that exists”; fifth, and most radical, is the “Academic freedom as revolution” school, which travels further down the same road by advocating not only the critique but the abolition of existing social structures.

http://features.columbiaspectator.com/eye/2015/03/12/left-and-lefter/

“Left and Lefter: What does it mean to be a liberal activist at Columbia?”

http://mondoweiss.net/2015/03/berkeley-bans-intifada

actually, a hashtag, 'dintifada'

Following up on Daniel Mael’s claim that Sumayyah Din promoted “the murder of innocent men, women and children as part of her campaign platform,” I asked Din if she had any plans to inflict violence on campus.

Haha, no. I can confidently say I have no plans to inflict any violence towards any groups on campus. I would never want to carry or condone any message of violence or hatred. In fact, my campaign is themed with a central dogma of love, solidarity, and unity.

haha, no. lol college

There seems to be a big back and forth in the UC system between the Israeli divestment crowd and the jews.. and since these kids are in lol college it gets really stupid

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-allegations-of-anti-israel-sentiments-rock-uc-campuses--20150307-story.html

http://www.timesofisrael.com/brandeis-whistleblower-stirs-up-new-hornets-nest/

Daniel Mael is likely the most divisive and hated pro-Israel voice at Brandeis University. Exposing inner-sanctum scandals, to many of the campus far-left — and much of the Brandeis administration — he’s that annoying fly that keeps on buzzing after being shooed away.

Characterized as a bully by those who differ from his staunch alliance with pro-Israel, pro-Judeo-Christian values, he’s been repeatedly called to the dean’s rug after well-publicized run-ins with Brandeis JStreet U leadership, among other incidents.

But now, following his most recent intrigue which took the 22 year old straight into the United States’ racial crisis inferno, he’s been advised by local police not to walk alone. Even his grandmother has been threatened.

What is it with Mael, a handsome, black kippah-wearing, well-spoken business major, that puts people on edge?

mondoweiss is full of such psychos. "what do you mean dintifada has associations with intifada? it's just an imaginary rhyming word we use to describe our political campaigns. you guys are crazy."

what % of jew-baiting takes the form of gaslighting

"Mael prefers to think of his support for the Jewish state under the rubric of respecting and fighting for Judeo-Christian values."

As a Jew I am truly baffled by what "Judeo-Christian values" is supposed to mean.

it's one of those super in vogue cultural terms that mean whatever you want it to mean when you use it

does it mean enlightenment values? does it mean progressive humanistic values? does it mean judeo-christian social morality? i assume probably not the latter.

my best guess for this guy is what it means is enlightenment values like free speech, free religion, suffrage, etc

thank you for sharing your views on free speech they are appreciated

Agree "J-C values" can mean all sorts of different things, deployed for different purposes in different contexts. Certainly related to enlightenment values, but I think conceptually distinct.

One thing the usage likely entails is a certain lineage of the philosophical idea of moral-ethical universality among human beings. E.g. salvation may not be universal, but not only are certain moral norms universal (e.g. against murder etc.) but they extend to all human beings, all human beings are to be treated as human beings, whether they're within the tribe or not, just by virtue of being human. I.e. you have ethical obligations/ prohibitions with respect to another human being even if they're heathen, barbarian, etc.-- forebear of the idea of universal human rights, etc.

(Of course philosophical idea and historical actuality very different things!)

i think one of the ironies might be that he'd probably include israel's acceptance of homosexuality as an example of these J-C values, even tho u kno

Ha yes. But it's sorta valid if you look at it genealogically. J-C values back in the day involve an identity or concordance of scriptural revelation, natural law, and Reason. The secularization of J-C values (i.e. the Enlightenment) dispenses with the first and focuses on the third (with an added valence of liberation). Some twists and turns since then, but you could argue that acceptance of homosexuality is in its way an heir to this tradition. Ain't history grand.

back in the day could you even speak of "J-C values" was that a thing that made sense to speak of.

and in what sense is the enlightenment a "secularization" of them instead of just you know a new thing and is "liberation" a value even wtf is this doing on this thread.

Good questions but they're precisely the complications and ongoing arguments of intellectual history. Especially when it comes to the study of "new things" especially self-consciously self-identified "new things" like the Enlightenment.

Doing fuck all in this thread other than late night off topic yadda.

PS they really are good questions but I'm not sure if you'd like me to try to reply or just shut up; anyway I'm sleepy

normally, people who speak about j-c values mean that they hate muslims.

J-C values seems to boil down to how one uses idolatry of christ's sacrifice for personal/political gain.

http://tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/189543/trigger-warnings-on-campus

Ime "Judeo-Christian" values is something Christians say when they mean "Eh we p much share a moral standard based on believing in the same God, and we have to include them because their existence enabled our true faith."

"I mean they got the Jesus part wrong but as long as they don't allow women to speak in front of men, we're good."

my pt tho is that's obv not what this dude means bc the term has a bunch of different meanings depending on the context

For instance in this case an "everyone who's not us" dog whistle.

So in your eyes what defending Israel from a judeo-christian pov means is just "a dog whistle" for everyone that isn't him. Pretty shallow comprehension imho.

i guess i shouldn't be surprised that your interpretation of anything boils down to "secret racism"

Sometimes things are just as shallow as they appear. There might be good reasons to support Israel in various senses of the word "support" but "we believe in the same magical fable, and our fable is better than all those other people's" is a quite bad one.

Sometimes it's "secret racism," sometimes it's "organized religion will kill us all" -- six of one, half dozen of another.

ime "judeo-christian" values does not mean "we believe in the same magical fable," not least bc of the contradictions that arise like toleration of homosexuality which obv have nothing to do w/ the "magical fable" that it the OT or NT

You agree w Jesus but not entirely about the not lending money part, you don't really want to give that up.

ive always taken it be much broader, sort of like an ethnocentrism of "the West."

^^^ ryan gets it

ive always taken it be much broader, sort of like an ethnocentrism of "the West."

agree, because "Christian" incorporates some "classical" "Greco-Roman" values as well

ironically acc to Maimonidies (who is as big an authority of Jewish law as any historical figure, if not the biggest), Judaism is much closer to Islam than to Christianity bc they are both true monotheisms, and a Jew is allowed to go into a Mosque according to halacha (Jewish law) but not into a Church (and my wife and I got in trouble on a Orthodox touring trip to Italy when we slipped away from the group to visit St Peters). so really from a superficial level judeo-christian makes no sense at all, while judeo-islam makes a lot more sense. but since judeo-christian doesn't really mean theological compatibility so much as Western values, it's not a contradiction for this dude using the terminology.

Hm I think I see where I've been unclear, which is that I don't actually think in usage that "jc values" literally means theological compatibility or similarity to most people (although hardcore American Christians do I think literally mean that, but then they don't actually know any Jews probably).

Judaism is much closer to Islam than to Christianity

I think this is true for a lot of reasons!

sunni + shia islam tbh, they're both very theologically + aesthetically appealing to me. i imagine a lot of jews feel that it's a shame that israel + arab nations, or israel + iran (and i've heard from ppl who feel bad about both) haven't been productive relationships when the jews have a lot of commonalities w/ both. have u seen pictures of this building from my alma matter?

http://blogs.yu.edu/news/wp-content/uploads/sites/19/2011/09/Yeshiva-U1.jpg

mmmm i love minarets

daniel mael is an up and coming right wing hatchet man in the greater breitbart cooperation sphere, why are you all talking about this journalist's code-phrases to describe what he believes

bc eephus wrote: "As a Jew I am truly baffled by what "Judeo-Christian values" is supposed to mean."

"judeo-christian" is iirc a neologism of the 50s, when some profession of adherence to a faith (w/o getting too testy about the details plz) was seen as best civic religion vs communism, and (public) antisemitism became more and more taboo

xp ah well i hope eephus has learned something

might as well just be code for "conservatism" in this case tbh

More code for "neoliberalism" imo

The man Doug Williams with a booming post

“What are we doing here?”

That is a question that I often ask my wife, a fellow organizer. I do not ask that question about place; I ask that question about strategy. I wonder what shaming people for simple mistakes does for movement-building, or abusing basic sociological concepts to divide people and disrupt momentum, or acting like the capitalists and privileged classes that we claim to be against. Her answer is the same every time: “I have no idea.”

Neither do I. And neither do the communities who need our help."

what happened with your housemate

Everything has been put on hold due to the sudden unfortunate news that the house has been bought out from under us. There's not a lot of point in mediation if we're ending this arrangement by the fall.

foiled again :-(

http://www.citadelnutritionblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/moneybags.jpg

"Judeo-Christian values" imo only exist as a vague endorsement of the position that the ten commandments form the right and proper foundation for morality.

The vague phraseology allows the person endorsing j-c values to hint that they are really referencing the "thou shalt not kill/steal/commit adultrery/bear false witness" bits. However, the person using the phrase usually thinks the "thou shalt have no other gods before me" and "remember the Sabbath and keep it holy" bits are absolutely indispensable, but they prefer not to say so, in case you have trouble with them.

idk the right place for this article, but this is as good as any i guess? http://thehardtimes.net/2015/03/11/safe-space-actually-a-terrible-fire-hazard/

no racism but you're more likely to die: the post-colonialism story