Thursday, September 21, 2017 ... Français/Deutsch/Español/Česky/Japanese/Related posts from blogosphere

UC Berkeley is breeding intellectually worthless crybabies

Sane employers should better not hire the alumni

Events at UC Berkeley have often shocked us but they always find a way to surpass our expectations. I actually learned about the newest free-speech-related events from Echo, a Czech mainstream right-wing journal, where brilliant student Ms Lucie Sulovská wrote about the University Whiners: What You Should Better Be Silent About In a College.

Much of the content is similar to Elizabeth M. Economou's article about Poor Babies at Lifezette.

OK, so conservative pundit Ben Shapiro gave a speech last week. The police maneuvers resembled 9/11 or something like that. Barricades, checks of purses and backpacks, permission to the cops who may have used pepper spray. The university had to close the upper rows in a hall because of worries that the students would be throwing chairs to the front of the hall... No Islamic terrorists were involved. The place only needed the security during Shapiro's speech "Say No to violence in the academic environment".

Shapiro had to thank police because indeed, without these very special arrangements, the talk would have been impossible – like the talks of other conservative thinkers in the recent past.

But the special security arrangements were only a small part of the story. Provost of this "cradle of the free speech movement" Paul Alivisatos said:

We are deeply concerned about the impact some speakers may have on individuals' sense of safety and belonging. No one should be made to feel threatened or harassed simply because of who they are or for what they believe.
Wow. So just by their very thoughts – very culturally and thoughtfully expressed thoughts, by the way – the speakers such as Ben Shapiro could "threaten the sense of safety and belonging".

Let me tell you something. These crybabies should indeed be stripped of any sense of "belonging" because they obviously don't belong to a university which is a place where the cultivated, free exchange of ideas is the main, defining activity. It's absolutely shameful that an indoctrination center that builds on exactly opposite values calls itself "a university". UC Berkeley is obviously not a university if it defends its youth's "sense of safety and belonging" against thinkers' ideas. If the European Union had some respect for the European traditions, it would send bombers and flatten Berkeley for the desecration of this important European word – but indeed, the European Union has almost no respect for the European values, either.

Let's go a bit further. These young people don't belong to a university but they don't really belong to the U.S. or the Western civilization, either. Their sensitivity is absolutely incompatible with the values that our part of the world represents. If you're one of the crybabies who need a help of psychologists in the wake of Ben Shapiro's talk and if they are telling you that you belong here or to America, they are brutally deceiving you because you don't. And indeed, lots of Americans feel very strongly about that point and would like to help you to relocate to a different place where your feelings would be more psychologically pleasing.

Also, I despise the typical parents of the UC Berkeley students who placed their kids to this would-be college. They may be wealthy but they simply suck as parents if they find it convenient to send the kids to an institution that turns them into mental cripples who are unable to deal with ideas or, more generally, live in the real world. What did the kids do to you that you are turning them into such creatures who must be defended against ideas?

The provost's comments above were said in order to justify the would-be university's free psychological help to those who are devastated by the very fact that a conservative thinker gives a talk at Berkeley. Ms Lucie Sulovská asks:
Let me get it straight: Do some adult people need the help of a psychologist because a conservative man will give a talk at their campus? The brawls could be the lesser evil, after all.
I would probably add that people who need the help of a psychologist in similar circumstances should be stripped of their voting rights if not their legal capacity. They're just not sufficiently psychologically healthy to be considered full-blown citizens. It's unwise for the society to allow such people – who can't really deal even with the most mundane events in their own life – to influence the political evolution of a nation.

These things didn't end with Shapiro's talk. As Daily Californian informs, in the middle of numerous weird statements, Milo Yiannopoulos – whose February talk had to be cancelled – organizes the Free Speech Week next week, between September 24th and 27th. He, Steve Bannon, and Ann Coulter should finally be able to speak at the campus although I haven't investigated how big are the guarantees that it will actually become possible.

How did the lefties at the campus react? Members of the UC Berkeley's Academic Senate penned a petition calling for a boycott of classes during that week! If something as shocking as free speech – even for top conservative pundits – is encouraged (surely for the first time at least in 50 years), the students and instructors have the right to skip the classes for the whole week!

If there were at least some adults in the room over there, this lazy, extremist, parasitic filth that has signed this outrageous "petition" would be fired immediately. (Yes, virtually all of them are from bogus departments of some pseudo-scholarly whining affirmative-action-powered jerks that should be abolished as wholes.) But do you know who is the most adult man at UC Berkeley? Ann Coulter, once in 50 years. (This is a variation of the well-known joke what is the smartest cell in a female body... A sperm.)

Some statements written by these scumbags are truly amazing. For example, the petition says:
It is not just physical violence that our campus faces from this media circus. Many of these provocateurs’ most committed audiences are online, and the Breitbart media machine uses that audience to harass, cyberbully, and threaten anyone who speaks out against them. Students and faculty on our campus have already had their lives threatened for speaking out against Milo and his followers. Online threats are real threats, and if we allow this intolerant and bullying version of free speech to take over our campus, then it can only but come at the expense of the free speech rights of the Berkeley community as a whole.
So the biggest threat are the critics of the far left loons, critics who dare to be online? Let me share a secret with you. America has been On Line (AOL) at least since the mid 1990s, so the people who despise your behavior and ideas are online as well. Sometimes, these people are at work. Sometimes, they are online. Sometimes, they are in voting booths voting for Trump or someone else. Sometimes, when a hurricane comes, the white male confederate heroes are saving the lives of the people of color. But one of the features of the online interactions is that everyone can escape them – they can't physically kill anybody. The online exchanges of opinions are pure speech, however intense they become. So the comments at Breitbart or elsewhere simply cannot be framed as a physical or existential threat for anybody.

Otherwise the description of the extreme leftists as "victims of some violence" is absolutely incredible. One must have lived in a different galaxy if he hasn't noticed that it was the alt-leftists – like Antifa – who have devastated whole portions of Berkeley. If the law enforcement officials were a little bit more assertive, they could have shot hundreds of these left-wing extremists dead. And after all these scenes that you can easily find on YouTube, you have the chutzpah to say that the Breitbart comments supporting the conservative speakers are the real threats for Berkeley?

These "instructors" have really created the current generation of students. 20% of college students in the U.S. think that it's right to use violence against "offensive" speakers. Surely you're not disappointed by this fact at all. Surely you don't have a problem to say that the speakers are the source of the violence.

I consider e.g. Milo Yiannopoulos to be a centrist thinker/entertainer – after all, much of his thinking and feeling is close to that of a typical gay – and he's the source of these intense reactions. What would happen if an actual right-winger such as myself were supposed to speak there? When the news are extracted in this way, I can actually not believe that I have visited the UC Berkeley campus. ;-) It must have been a story in a different life or in a different Universe.

Add to Digg this Add to reddit

snail feedback (0) :