What if I made a flyer that promoted a "Black lives matter mostly peaceful arson and riot" ? Somehow I don't think Stanford would be saying "chill out it's just satire."
What is the significant difference between a satirical flyer titled “Black Lives Matter — Mostly Peaceful Arson and Riot” and a satirical flyer titled “The Originalist Case for Inciting Insurrection”? I’ll grant the second is more original, and perhaps wittier in the context of a mostly progressive law school audience. But both of these are intended to mock one side and entertain the other. Both of these are crass, and both implicitly defame.
However only one of these would be met with a school-wide email from the university president apologizing for the offense and reaffirming commitments to support and promote diversity. I think this is what the original poster is asserting.
> But both of these are intended to mock one side and entertain the other. Both of these are crass, and both implicitly defame.
So what? That's not illegal. You're allowed to criticize others—that's a key purpose of the First Amendment.
Respectfully, I believe you’ve missed the point of my post, which is not to assert the validity or invalidity of either perspective (I agree both should be protected by the first amendment), but to question why the audience of this website downvoted the original post so readily, and to boost the opinion that there is a political bias in university administrations.
Additionally, the flyer about Black Lives Matter could equally well be a talk.
And if it were, it might hypothetically have been tolerated.
However, "Black lives matter mostly peaceful arson and riot" doesn't describe a talk, it describes an arson and riot. Claims that Stanford reacting differently to the two would merely be due to political bias is disingenuous projection.
Maybe GP intended to describe a satirical talk exactly like the one in the OP, but they didn't, and their language entirely undercut the premise of their attempted argument.
However I still assert that the talk titled as it is in my post would not be met well.
I think it’s fair to assume that there is a political bias in university administrations. Here’s an opinion piece where the author states that in their survey of political leanings in university administration the bias is significant.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/16/opinion/liberal-college-a...
I could not find any documentation or review of this survey. It does agree with my own observation however.
I doubt anyone will read these articles because they are afraid of being called racist but for example here:
https://www.pnas.org/content/116/32/15877
and then there was a very small "correction" which changes nothing:
https://www.pnas.org/content/117/16/9127
and then note the weasily "retraction" that don't really retract anything that happened right when BLM was taking off.
https://www.pnas.org/content/117/30/18130
If you dont think BLM receives special treatment please contact me because I have a bridge in new york to sell you.
>https://www.pnas.org/content/117/30/18130
Holy cow. One can almost see the gun pointed off-camera at the hostage assuring viewers that he is being well treated!