RG says:"...inasmuch as conservatives are taught to use logic
and reason..."--- Where? From most conservative comments on
these threads that is certainly not apparent.
To "Frozen Fractals" I don't know what dimension you come from, but
here in this reality, the KKK was a branch of the Democrat party. In fact they
had a Clansman in office until 2010.The ideologies that you list are
not dependent on political ideology. The KKK is against limited government.
They, like DEMOCRATS want more government.Nice try, but you are
The root cause of current incivility and intolerance begins with the culture of
entitlement and the falsehood of political correctness. Political correctness
is a societal masquerade and a disingenuous charade of civility and acceptance
of differences. Being “PC” veils dishonesty and is a
conscious denial of reality as opposed to sincerity born of heartfelt tolerance
and civility without compromising the truth or being in denial of reality or
facts. The PC movement within the culture of entitlement gives rise to the
narrowing of the mind rather than the opening of the mind and heart. The ivory tower mentality and the nefarious nature of our litigious society
have combined to achieve the direct opposite of their purported aim: greater
free speech, tolerance, and civility.Conservatives and liberals or
members of political parties by their very nature are neither civil nor
tolerant. They are not open to the free exchange of ideas; but rather imposing
their agenda on everyone else and suppressing freedom.Recent campus
protests and tantrums at town hall meetings are simply outward symptoms of the
greater illness that afflicts our culture.
@RedShirt"FYI the Klu Klux Klan was founded by DEMOCRATS and NEVER has
been RIGHT WING."That's just false. The Dixiecrats split
off the Dems after the Civil Rights Act and Nixon scooped them up. Even Reagan
made his first post-convention campaign stop at a county fair in Mississippi in
a play to supporters of George Wallace. "If you bothered to look
into the KKK ideologies, they are LEFT WING."What I do know is
they're quite anti-immigrant, hate Muslims, aren't very fond of gay
people, certainly can't be confused with feminists, and oh yeah,
they're racist. Maybe they support universal healthcare and infrastructure
spending... but on the things we typically associate with the KKK in a negative
context... those are far right-wing.
To "1aggie " actually, since the passage of the civil rights act, your
ilk claims the KKK is right wing. If you bothered to look into the KKK
ideologies, they are LEFT WING.You are reading a lot into what I
stated. I stated that the LEFT claims to be tolerant. I didn't say that
you claim the left to be tolerant. That is what the leading figures of the left
wing and especially the Democrat Party claim. The irony is that those on the
left are the least tolerant, and that has been proven in various studies.Do you deny science that has proven the left to be intolerant?Do you want to be associated with an intolerant ideology?Actually,
it was Berkley's fault that the Alt-Left was able to get onto their campus,
and were able to do the damage that they did. You do realize that at Berkley
there are many PROFESSORS and ADMINISTRATORS that condone and sanction the
actions of the alt-left. They have raised the Alt-Left, now the Alt-Left has
come home to roost.You really ought to read my questions again, and
actually answer the question, rather than trying to detract with tangents
designed to distract from the sins of the LEFT.
RedShirtPlease point out where I condoned or supported violence or riots.
"1. If the LEFT that you identify with, claim to be tolerant of
all ideas, why to they keep rioting and protesting anybody with a different
point of view?Where did I claim "the left" claims to be
tolerant of all ideas? I acknowledged there are left-wing extremists as there
are right-winged extremists. I did state that UC Berkeley (the
institution) has a well-established record of defending free speech which is
true, hence inviting Milo to speak in the first place. It was not UC
Berkeley's fault that people came from outside the campus and engaged in
rioting and looting. 2. Do you really want to be identified with
people that can't handle an opposing point of view?"Define,
"can't handle." I've never, ever supported violence, looting
etc. I noticed you haven't distanced yourself from right-winged
extremists McVeigh, Adkisson, Eric Rudolph etc."FYI the Klu Klux
Klan was founded by DEMOCRATS and NEVER has been RIGHT WING."Perhaps, until passage of the Civil Rights Act. Since then Klan groups are
more often affiliated with right-winged extremist groups.
Shoutdown does not belong in public forum or town hall venue/gatherings etc.Civility must prevail. Signs are mostly civil, voices need to be calm.Physical violence or threat of same is NEVER acceptable.Damage to property is NEVER acceptable.The current generation of
spoiled, brainwashed students enrolled in liberal arts post secondary
institutions are totally out of touch with the concept of freedom of speech.Hiding your face when committing felonies is juvenile, childlike to say
Free speech is not tolerated on college campuses. This is a close minded left
wing threatening environment unless you attend BYU or Liberty University .
To "1aggie" since you are so young, you probably didn't notice the
difference. When CPAC disinvited Milo there were NO RIOTS. How many riots have
been right wing inspired? How many protests have been as ugly as what your ilk
constantly promotes?You and your ilk cheer on the ALT LEFT in their
tactics of riots and rampage.FYI the Klu Klux Klan was founded by
DEMOCRATS and NEVER has been RIGHT WING.But that is just a tangent.
You failed to address the questions I asked you directly. Can you answer them
yet? 1. If the LEFT that you identify with, claim to be tolerant of
all ideas, why to they keep rioting and protesting anybody with a different
point of view?2. Do you really want to be identified with people
that can't handle an opposing point of view?"
@Redshirt...... you are right.... she choose to do the right thing and take in
a child that wasn't being cared for by another relative. I am not really
sure what your point is. Are you saying as a society, we should praise those
who have "high IQs" and use those only to serve themselves, or as a
society those who sacrifice to help others out. I am not really sure though
it had anything to do with their IQ, but their morals. We all make
judgements what we will sacrifice for success. But we all don't have the
same opportunities - and that has nothing to do with IQ.Peoples
success is largely not how high their IQ is, but a lot of time how much they are
willing to sacrifice for that success. Sometimes those successes are worth it.
Sometimes those sacrifices are placed on others shoulders.
@Redshirt"If the LEFT that you identify with, claim to be tolerant of
all ideas, why to they keep rioting and protesting anybody with a different
point of view? Do you really want to be identified with people that can't
handle an opposing point of view?"You seem to be saying that I
and anybody left of center identifies and/or support/condones tactics of left
wing extremist groups simply because they are left of center. Then, using your
logic, the same broad brush could be used to paint those right of center as
supporting the actions of people such as Timothy McVeigh, James Adkisson, Klu
Klux Klan etc and other extremists on the right. (Newsweek also had an article
on right-winged extremism). But, I'll refrain from applying
the broad bush because I understand extremism exists on both sides but is not
indicative of the majority. Btw, CPAC (Conservative Political
Action Conference) escaped criticism for disinviting Milo, while Trump suggested
UCBerkeley funding should be questioned).
TMR:I agree that the Sons of Liberty, who made up the majority of the
rioters in the BTP, were definitely not civil (as I stated in my post). I also
agree that many of the leaders of the revolution not only bemoaned their actions
in the BTP, but their actions in general as being "rash and without
discipline". So my point was not to say that the young fellas in
the Sons of Liberty were any more civil or had any more decorum than
today's youth on campuses, it was to suggest that their cause was for
freedom from a foreign, dictatorial nation who sought to diminish their rights.
In contrast, the youth spoken of in this OpEd seek to belittle and stamp out
speech contrary to their world view. This makes their cause less noble because
any violence toward, shaming of, or drowning out of free speech is offensive to
the Constitution, and therefore offensive to OUR nation and to those who have
fought, and continue to fight for it's efficacy.
To "airnaut" so you refuse to answer the question, and go for the
tangent and personal attack. Your "tolerance" is showing. This has nothing to do with Trump. If you want to talk about unfaithful
marriage, destruction of family, and so forth, your gal Hillary is EQUAL TO
TRUMP. If you want to talk destruction of the Constitution, you should do some
self evaluation and consider the fact that Trump is only doing what your ilk
allowed under Obama.So again, tell us which is a noble cause.
Protesting against wars, protesting to ensure equal rights, or protesting
because you don't want to hear an opposing view on a topic.Let
me repeat that, tell us which is a noble cause. Protesting against wars,
protesting to ensure equal rights, or protesting because you don't want to
hear an opposing view on a topic.How about a third time, tell us
which is a noble cause. Protesting against wars, protesting to ensure equal
rights, or protesting because you don't want to hear an opposing view on a
topic.Can you do that, or are you going to try to distract again?
@RedShirt - USS Enterprise, UTMarch 20, 2017 9:20 a.m.To
"airnaut" tell us which is a noble cause. Protesting against wars,
protesting to ensure equal rights, or protesting because you don't want to
hear an opposing view on a topic.========= Donald Trump
is a proven adulterer, fraud and pathological liar who is trampling our sacred
Constitution.Are YOU willing to man up and enlist in his wars, or
send you kids or grand kids into one?
Cougsndawgs: You are correct, I should not have compared the motives of the
Boston Tea Party to today's youth. In doing so, I slight these young
people. Your description of the motives of the tea party protestors is far too
generous. The BTP saga was not about free speech, but was instead instigated by
the British government's bailout of a corporation - the East India Company
- deemed too big to fail. Many of the early Patriots, including George
Washington, decried the BTP's destruction of property. It was only decades
later that the BTP found itself shrouded in iconic mythology. Now, about
today's young people: have you personally met a single young person who has
protested Trump and the ideas of the far right? I have and I suggest that in
most - although not in all - cases, their motives are more honorable than many
of the protestors in the BTP. So, you are correct, the comparison was a slight
and I apologize.
To "UtahBlueDevil" from what you say, that lady you know that
doesn't earn much (she wasn't held back) is suffering from the results
of her own decisions. As you say, a high IQ does not equate to higher earnings.
She made choices early in her life that have limited her earning potential. I
feel bad that she limited herself like she did, but that that doesn't mean
she is would be justified in protesting an opposing point of view.To
"1aggie" look beyond the headline for the Berkley Riots. Look at who
instigated the riots. According to Newsweek and other sources, the riots were
instigated by LEFT WING groups. If the LEFT that you identify with, claim to be
tolerant of all ideas, why to they keep rioting and protesting anybody with a
different point of view? Do you really want to be identified with people that
can't handle an opposing point of view?To "airnaut"
tell us which is a noble cause. Protesting against wars, protesting to ensure
equal rights, or protesting because you don't want to hear an opposing view
on a topic.
Good Grief.Like the Vietnam War protests in the 60's and 70's
did nothing?or Tiananmen Square?
"The city of Berkeley, for example, is still reeling from the riots that
preceded the canceled University of California, Berkeley,"First
and foremost there is no evidence to date that UC Berkeley students were
involved in rioting or looting. The students had actually planned a dance
coinciding with Milo's appearance. It is believed the rioters and looters
were part of an outside group which have appeared at other events around the
country. UC Berkeley, unlike many institutions, has a solid record of
supporting freedom of speech. (Peaceful protests are also an
exercise of freedom of speech).
Intolerance and civility are mutually exclusive. There is an abundance of
intolerance of other people's viewpoints; hence, there is a proportionate
abundance of incivility in how people respond to other viewpoints.President Obama was a strong advocate of embracing what he termed a
"robust exchange of ideas." Especially at institutions of higher
education, he believed people should be able to express their viewpoints and be
challenged by other viewpoints. Robust exchanges can take place in a civil
manner. It is possible to disagree, even vehemently, without being
disagreeable.Unfortunately, the intolerance that exists across the
spectrum of ideologies makes civil discourse and dialog an unrealistic dream.
Probably one of the things higher education can do is teach people how to come
together in dialog - to disagree - but how to resolve those disagreements. What
the visiting lecture represented was that people success had to do with their
IQ, that their social economic uprearing had little to do with these people
opportunity and access to success. It is reasonable to understand how that
proposition was offensive to some. I know of one lady who is very
intelligent, but whose personal success has absolutely been held back by family
history, and the fact that she choose to raise he siblings child - when he
wasn't able to. She is very bright. She is a hard worker. But every
penny she earns goes out the door for survival. She works 2 to 3 jobs. This
isn't about lack of IQ - but circumstances that determine her ability to
pursue opportunities. The lectures proposition is an insult to
people like her. She would have every justification to protesting this person.
The universities just need to provide a positive forum to counter protest the
To "GingerMarshall" just look at your list of major protest movements.
College campuses have gone from protesting to protect equal rights, to
protesting wars, to what we have now. The current group of college kids are
protesting opposing views. It is sad when college age kids can't handle
having somebody present a viewpoint that is different than their own.
Surf is Up - you nailed it with your accurate and thoughtful comment. Many of
us fear for the future because of how many citizens have stood still and allowed
these insidious notions to flourish is our once great country.
The uncivilized type of behavior exhibited by these extremist protestors is what
got Donald Trump elected. Many of us conservatives view this behavior as a
threat to freedom of expression. Worse, we view this as bullying behavior
designed to extinguish any voice of opposition to their "one-mind"
philosophy. Not only was the behavior boorish and offensive but it turns many
of us to a defensive posture where we are less likely to listen to or tolerate
the leftist's point of view. We want diversity of thought and expression
and if some of it is offensive to us we can just tolerate it like adults - what
we won't tolerate is the shutting down of diversity of thought and the
silencing through intimidation of our freedom of expression. Mr. Murray has
just as much right to express his ideas as they do theirs.
"There are, of course, instances in which demonstrations are justified as an
expression of civil discontent."And, pray tell, what are those
instances? Is it during a congressional town hall meeting where if you
don't agree with what is being said you shout down the speaker? The
decorum exhibited since Trump was elected is truly one of selfishness, tantrum
imitating, and unworthy of intelligent human beings. It is reactionary,
belittling, mocking and generally a rejection not only of ideas but particularly
of those that might think differently, expressed in an elitist manner. I
witnessed that first hand during the Legacy Highway hearings.To ask
colleges for civility is like asking a leopard to change his spots, although
there was one exception when Michael Moore came to speak at UVU. He was treated
with respect even though most found his message to be fairy tales.The liberals, especially Hillary and Obama, who lectured Trump and the rest of
the country about accepting the results of the election need to look themselves
in the mirror. The newspaper has photos of some of these folks; I am certain
they consider themselves patriots but they are only troublemakers.
TMR:Are you really comparing the Boston Tea Party to incivility on college
campuses...to hold such campus incivility somehow in a positive light? The
Boston Tea Party was done in contempt of, and as a message against a foreign
nation's taxation of shipping without any legal reciprocity through
representation in British Parliament. No, the Sons of Liberty were
certainly not civil, but their riots were against unfair laws and practices by a
nation exercising dominion over us, not against ideas that were counter to their
own. They didn't have the right to speak ill against King George, but
fought the Revolution to give us the right to question, make fun of, and even
mock our civic leaders...they fought for the right of all people to voice their
opinion in the public square. Their's was not a mission of squelching ideas
but allowing all ideas to be heard without reciprocity from any monarchy or
government. To compare them to the tantrums and rioting of today's youth is
disingenuous at worst and naive at best.
BYU has, on multiple occasions, invited forum speakers whose political views and
personal feelings are at odds with those expressed by a majority of BYU
students. A few months ago, a forum speaker came that strongly emphasized and
expressed support of things like affirmative action (a subject that most BYU
students are politically opposed to). Her talk was very heavily influenced by
her more liberal political views. There were no riots. There were no protests.
Any disagreements expressed were done politely and properly. Before that, they
invited the former White House press secretary for George W. Bush. He expressed
his own conservative political feelings throughout his speech. The liberal
students (and, although they are far fewer in number, they are present at BYU,
contrary to popular belief) took no issue with his presence on campus, did not
protest or incite riots, and any possible disagreements expressed were done so
civilly and respectfully.Clearly, civil discourse regarding
differing opinions can and should be exercised. May all the Berkeleys and
Middleburys of the world learn this message.
As a professor in a major west coast university, I can attest to the civility of
great majority of the students, even when confronted by offensive speech. As an
American, I am also cognizant that incivility, on occasion, has marked this
country in positive ways. Would anyone, for example, describe the Boston Tea
Party as being civil?
GingerMarshall,So it's OK for people to riot, use violence,
threaten other's safety and shout down speakers -- as long as those who are
engaging in that behavior happen to agree with you?Liberals were all
for freedom of speech during the 1960s when they were protesting against the
draft and the Vietnam War (I was around during that time period to see it.)
The name Mario Savio (leader of the Free Speech movement at U.C. Berkeley) may
"ring a bell" for some of us.Meanwhile, it is interesting
how the commitment that liberals once had to freedom of speech seems to have
mysteriously disappeared when people started disagreeing with them (on issues
like abortion or same sex marriage, for example),
Just to be clear, GingerMarshall, you are advocating physical violence and riots
in order to protest people who think differently from you?
These bad behaviors are supported and encouraged by far left groups because they
know they can't win in debate of ideas - shouting down those you disagree
with only come from the lefties.
While maybe it is getting worse lately, especially with these two incidents,
college students have shouted down speakers for years, or tried to prevent the
speech from even happening. All the cases I've heard about have been
liberal students trying to prevent conservative speeches from happening.
(Likewise the antiTrump protests on inauguration day were sometimes
violent/destructive, whereas no similar riots occurred when Obama was
inaugurated.) Perhaps there have been some examples of the opposite happening,
but if so I have not heard about them. And they seem less likely, inasmuch as
conservatives are taught to use logic and reason, not emotion, and to act
civilly. I live near (about 40 miles away) Liberty University (private
Christian institution, organized by Jerry Falwell, and leans strongly
conservative) which, to their credit, invites various speakers of differing
viewpoints, and the students are always civil, no matter if they agree or
Seriously, what do you expect? In a society where it is frowned upon
or rendered illegal, for parents to discipline their children with a sometimes
heavy hand?Where children come to expect a participation trophy in
everything they do? Where they are continually taught that everyone wins and
nobody really loses, and therefore don't know how to handle losing?When behaving badly is encouraged when it is against perceived injustice
and lawlessness is not met with recompense by those who are supposedly
"grown ups"?And perhaps most insidious of all-- when
impressionable minds are indoctrinated by those who are supposed to be educating
them without an agenda-- sometimes holding acceptable grades above their heads
if the won't comply or regurgitate the tenets demanded by their
professors?All of what is happening was ordered by its self. I weep
for the future.I weep for my children whom I love with all my heart,
and sometimes do so with a heavy hand for their sakes.
In the 50s and early 60s college students protested segregation, acting as
Freedom Riders throughout the south to work hard to secure voting and other
Civil Rights for black Americans. In the late 60s and early 70s
college students actively protested the badly mismanaged war in Vietnam that was
grinding through American lives for absolutely no good reason.We
also saw women protesting unequal treatment in education, the workplace, and
society in general.In the 80s ACT-UP, and then an increasing
presence of college students, protested about the government totally ignoring
AIDS and public health.We saw Americans protesting the Cheny/Bush
war for oil in the Middle East following 9/11. The day after the
inaguration millions and millions of women and men hit the streets to protest
the Trump regime taking office - for good reason as it turns out two months
later and we're seeing a cabinet full of swamp dwellers and a budget that
guts vital services for the elderly, the disabled, and the poor, and leave
24,000,000 currently insured Americans without healthcare coverage. This isn't new, it is very much needed.
Children act with entitlement today, respond with a temper tantrums, and are
filled with progressive, foolish notions that can't be satisfied by a
speaker that challenges 'their' world. How sad. Colleges, instead
of teaching them to grow up, give into their demands and suffer the consequences
of what the general populace now believes about 'higher education', a
place for whiners and foolish teachers marching toward 'social
justice' with not a clue as to what that means or how it affects the world!
The editorial is entirely correct. For a moment, however, I read it to say that
only when a protest rises to the level of a physical assault has a line been
crossed. So thanks for adding the final comment about the absolute need for
My step mother graduated from this college. She was so sickened by the violence
that she wrote the school president to say she will no longer donate to her alma
mater. She had seen this sort of violence escalating there. The school replied
the violence was from non-students.Turn the fire hoses on the
protestors and most will stop. Arrest the most violent.