Hate speech and incitement to be mandated

[Evariste Euler Gauss]

Satchmo, have you read anything Murray has written? The Bell Curve was a detailed statistical survey of various social phenomena in the US (income levels, education levels, crime levels etc) and their correlation with IQ scores, with numerous painstaking exercises in statistical control for other variables. It's a vast dry tome referencing all significant previous work in the area and is pretty much the pinnacle of work in that field of sociological research. There isn't anything "pseudo" about the social science in it, it's practically a case study in scientific rigour and restraint from over-hasty conclusion. Nor is there an ounce of malice anywhere in it.

[N est à?]

The British right, having no ideas of their own, just copy-pasting US culture war bullshit. Altho such tactics always end up looking a bit piddly and pathetic in a british context- anyone remember theresa may getting cross about easter eggs?

[N est à?]

EEG trying to start his own culture war on otf it seems.

[Tubby Isaacs]

I don't see how the fact that Prevent exists across the public sector (though I have to say no-one has ever told me to report Muslims for supporting Palestine's right to exist and I'm not sure who I'd report them to anyway) means that mentioning it here is "muddying the water".

Muddying what Jo Johnson's doing here, with universities as a specific target, that's what I mean.

[Tubby Isaacs]

The British right, having no ideas of their own, just copy-pasting US culture war bullshit. Altho such tactics always end up looking a bit piddly and pathetic in a british context- anyone remember theresa may getting cross about easter eggs?

I didn't even notice it happening. I remember Eric Pickles telling councils they should make enormous cuts but not to anything Christmas-related.

[N est à?]

Cross about easter eggs, ho ho ho I didn't even intend that

[Tubby Isaacs]

It's nothing to do with that. It's clearly an attempt to suppress student self-organisation - and an attempt to step up the culture war against young people (especially young left-wing lgbt people) that's hitherto been largely prosecuted in the broadsheet press. In particular, this is about the fact that transphobic feminists have been (correctly) getting the no platform treatment and it's bending to the moral panic whipped up in certain circles.

It's important to recognise that this moral panic and drive towards authoritarianism has been driven by people who largely sit on the centre-ground politically (the Times, the New Statesman, Spiked Magazine). May's attitude is probably that young people are a lost cause while middle-class transphobic remainers are winnable ground.

As Nef says, the biggest drivers of this stuff aren't "centrist" at all. Add the Telegraph to the list. The Times is an interesting one because it does sensible on the EU and this kind of rubbish, most notably Andrew Norfolk's lies about Tower Hamlets fostering. But I think this agenda fits better with the getting out the base than any kind of swing voter appeal.

[Bizarre Löw Triangle]

Spiked magazine and the Spectator don’t sit on the centre ground politically

I didn't say Spectator? Spiked is weird cos it has its roots in Trot movements and now peddles fash propaganda, but you'd be hard pressed to call it far-left or far-right.

As Nef says, the biggest drivers of this stuff aren't "centrist" at all. Add the Telegraph to the list. The Times is an interesting one because it does sensible on the EU and this kind of rubbish, most notably Andrew Norfolk's lies about Tower Hamlets fostering. But I think this agenda fits better with the getting out the base than any kind of swing voter appeal.

That's not true. Fundamentally, this isn't about the far-right's right to speak at universities. We all accept - from the government down - that National Action and Britain First shouldn't have platforms at universities.

The people who are most het up about "no platforming" or "censorship" are people who probably would have considered themselves on the right side of anti-racist and lgbt politics and have latterly drifted into anti-trans politics (or have always been there and they're now being challenged on it).

The Times' current anti-trans crusade has had a very left-wing flavour - they've run sympathetic stories about transphobes at the London Anarchist Bookfair and in Constituency Labour Parties. Similarly the New Statesman's brand of transphobia has always been one versed in feminist and left-wing discourse.

The right considers universities enemy territory anyway and considers students a lost cause. The scare stories about university censorship come primarily from the centre-left who aren't used to losing a culture war.

[The Awesome Berbaslug!!!]

Spiked is firmly on the "severely damaged attention seeking cunt" part of the political spectrum. Everyone writing for that shithouse wears their dysfunction in their articles.

[Tubby Isaacs]

I didn't say Spectator? Spiked is weird cos it has its roots in Trot movements and now peddles fash propaganda, but you'd be hard pressed to call it far-left or far-right.



That's not true. Fundamentally, this isn't about the far-right's right to speak at universities. We all accept - from the government down - that National Action and Britain First shouldn't have platforms at universities.

The people who are most het up about "no platforming" or "censorship" are people who probably would have considered themselves on the right side of anti-racist and lgbt politics and have latterly drifted into anti-trans politics (or have always been there and they're now being challenged on it).

The Times' current anti-trans crusade has had a very left-wing flavour - they've run sympathetic stories about transphobes at the London Anarchist Bookfair and in Constituency Labour Parties. Similarly the New Statesman's brand of transphobia has always been one versed in feminist and left-wing discourse.

The right considers universities enemy territory anyway and considers students a lost cause. The scare stories about university censorship come primarily from the centre-left who aren't used to losing a culture war.

The right isn't trying to win over students with this stuff. It's for outside consumption, people who don't understand that an LGBT society isn't "the university".

It's interesting the Times have chosen to approach the issue like that, but that doesn't make them centre left. It's not a new rightwing trope though to take some "rebels" and say "even these people think it's all gone too far".

I don't know about the New Statesmen, but I don't see it as anything like as important as the Spiked group in any of this. Their people get around the media far more than anybody to do with the New Statesman. These scumbags don't at all accept that Britain First shouldn't be able to rock up where it likes and say what it likes.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Talking of universities and culture wars, May's favourite paper wades in here.

http://zelo-street.blogspot.co.uk/20...-loses-it.html

Against 58 Oxford academics who've written a letter criticizing another academic running what looks like a project of empire apologism. As Tim Fenton points out, this academic (Nigel Biggar) has addressed Policy Exchange, the Tory think tank that's taken over the DfE.

It tries very hard to pin it on the Left, but finds that barely a third have even endorsed Labour, two are Labour members and only one is in Momentum. It also tries to tie them into opposing Brexit, but only 13 appear to have done anything on that score.

Remainer middle classes aren't to be won over by May. They're her enemy.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Tories having to go to Buckingham University for their poster boy on this issue.

Sir Anthony Seldon
@AnthonySeldon
Free speech within the law is the only sensible stand for universities. Suppression encourages the tyranny of the minority, and group think. Even if views are wrong-headed, foolish, politically motivated or evil. @JoJohnsonUK #FreeSpeech

I don't think Johnson's stuff is going down well in other places.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Michael White's onside though. When told that student unions aren't universities, he says "yeah, but who pays? we do".

[DCI Harry Batt]

Michael White's an arsehole.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Oh man.

The TelegraphVerified account
@Telegraph
Follow Follow @Telegraph
Universities will be less able to make scientific breakthroughs if they do not tackle 'safe space' culture, minister warns

[Lang Spoon]

Satchmo, have you read anything Murray has written? The Bell Curve was a detailed statistical survey of various social phenomena in the US (income levels, education levels, crime levels etc) and their correlation with IQ scores, with numerous painstaking exercises in statistical control for other variables. It's a vast dry tome referencing all significant previous work in the area and is pretty much the pinnacle of work in that field of sociological research. There isn't anything "pseudo" about the social science in it, it's practically a case study in scientific rigour and restraint from over-hasty conclusion. Nor is there an ounce of malice anywhere in it.

That is all extremely questionable EEG. I had to read the Bell Curve 20 odd year back and it is utterly pernicious and full of unfounded bullshit. The Current Affairs article Etienne linked to is a very eloquent demolition of his statistical analysis and prejudice reinforcing. Cross burning scumbag, dying in a fire is too good for him. Maybe his guts rotting with maggots like Herod is what he deserves.

[Lang Spoon]

Michael White's onside though. When told that student unions aren't universities, he says "yeah, but who pays? we do".

Michael White is an odious cunt. His patronizing sneering tone towards Scotland I’d call racism if I could be arsed.

[Lang Spoon]

Oh man.

The TelegraphVerified account
@Telegraph
Follow Follow @Telegraph
Universities will be less able to make scientific breakthroughs if they do not tackle 'safe space' culture, minister warns

That makes no fucking sense. Show your working.

[Tubby Isaacs]

There's rigorous scientific working behind it.

[Guy Profumo]

Giving racists and transphobic cunts a platform creates the impression that there is a legitimate debate. No Platform draws a line which says, "No, my right to exist is not up for discussion."

Hate speech kills people; it is homicide by indirect means. Cloaking it in pseudoscientific dross, like Murray does, makes no change to that fact. Free speech is not an absolute right; otherwise theatres throughout the land would have people being crushed to death on a regular basis.

This

[Tubby Isaacs]

Hold the front page, here's a new take, from the Brendan O'Neill quoting Lexit "Socialist. The problem is that the government are a bunch of PC multiculturalists.

Paul Embery
@PaulEmbery
Follow Follow @PaulEmbery
More
A government culpable as any other for fostering an atmosphere of censorship suddenly gets shirty about 'no-platforming' and 'safe spaces'. I don't believe them.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Be fair, those no platform folk have been properly hurting science.

[Satchmo Distel]

Satchmo, have you read anything Murray has written? The Bell Curve was a detailed statistical survey of various social phenomena in the US (income levels, education levels, crime levels etc) and their correlation with IQ scores, with numerous painstaking exercises in statistical control for other variables. It's a vast dry tome referencing all significant previous work in the area and is pretty much the pinnacle of work in that field of sociological research. There isn't anything "pseudo" about the social science in it, it's practically a case study in scientific rigour and restraint from over-hasty conclusion. Nor is there an ounce of malice anywhere in it.

Well IQ is 'pseudo'. It pretends to measure intelligence but is just some white middle-class males' idea of what intelligence is. The concept of 'race' is also 'pseudo' because we know that that there is more genetic variation within populations than between them. Crime statistics are not scientific: they are an outcome of a criminal justice system that targets certain groups disproportionately.

But the elephant in the room here is motive: why would someone want to prove that poor people are genetically inferior, especially poor black people? No malice, really?

[The Awesome Berbaslug!!!]

If you're reading some supposedly academic style book, that seems interested in proving that the way things are is natural and right, It probably saves time to throw it away immediately. This cunt sounds like the Niall Ferguson of the social sciences.

[Evariste Euler Gauss]

that seems interested in proving that the way things are is natural and right

It doesn't. The actual book that is, as opposed to the one people are imagining to their own perfect satisfaction without having bothered to read any of it.