Anonymous wrote:Isn't hate speech excluded from the freedom of speech?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I didn't know who this guy is until reading his op-ed in the WSJ today, and his tweet was stupid. That said, the worst part about this whole story is the black eye on Georgetown for not strongly advocating for free speech for their faculty. If this had happened at a state school like UMD, it would have riled up some students and faculty but the idea of taking any kind of administrative action would have immediately been quashed as the government cannot infringe upon free speech. Most liberal schools have signed onto the Chicago statement on freedom of speech. It is scary when institutions charged with generating knowledge and ideas "investigate" people for politically incorrect statements
This. We are truly in Mao's cultural revolution.
Anonymous wrote:All they care about is stoking their grievances.
But at least PP who thinks they should have engineered a way for him to leave will be happy.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I didn't know who this guy is until reading his op-ed in the WSJ today, and his tweet was stupid. That said, the worst part about this whole story is the black eye on Georgetown for not strongly advocating for free speech for their faculty. If this had happened at a state school like UMD, it would have riled up some students and faculty but the idea of taking any kind of administrative action would have immediately been quashed as the government cannot infringe upon free speech. Most liberal schools have signed onto the Chicago statement on freedom of speech. It is scary when institutions charged with generating knowledge and ideas "investigate" people for politically incorrect statements
This. We are truly in Mao's cultural revolution.
Anonymous wrote:Has Ilya explained yet why he praised ACB's nomination rather than dismissing her as a lesser woman candidate?
Anonymous wrote:I didn't know who this guy is until reading his op-ed in the WSJ today, and his tweet was stupid. That said, the worst part about this whole story is the black eye on Georgetown for not strongly advocating for free speech for their faculty. If this had happened at a state school like UMD, it would have riled up some students and faculty but the idea of taking any kind of administrative action would have immediately been quashed as the government cannot infringe upon free speech. Most liberal schools have signed onto the Chicago statement on freedom of speech. It is scary when institutions charged with generating knowledge and ideas "investigate" people for politically incorrect statements
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The whole saga puts Georgetown Law in a bad light. An actual top law school would never have extended him an offer in the first place and would certainly have figured out a reasonable way to get rid of him while still making donors happy. This just confirms that Georgetown Law is not a top law school, which I think we all already knew.
I agree they shouldn’t have hired him but they clearly thought having a “center” with some right wingers would help them. Having hired him there was no way they could get rid of him without looking like a second rate law school. But Georgetown still is clearly a top tier law school and it’s sort of silly to say otherwise.
Actually, elite institutions are quite savvy about getting rid of people quietly. They still could have that center (I understand it’s Koch-funded). It just didn’t need to be with this specific person. It truly looks like donors are making their employment decisions and that’s not elite. You expect it from George Mason. I would not have expected it from Georgetown but they now look juts as desperate as George Mason and should probably be ranked equivalent.