|
Terri Givens@profterrig.bsky.social |
Indeed, this is targeting faculty speech, particularly those who have a broader platform. I agree that we need to understand the history of social movements and what has and hasn’t been good strategy, but he’s conflating too many issues here. It’s confusing.
4 replies 2 reposts 12 likes
|
@surfingthepast.bsky.social
[ View ] |
I see he also does the “King and Lewis knew they’d face sanctions for their actions.” Uhh, so you are putting yourself on the side of those who threw King in jail and cracked Lewis’s skull? You know Bull Connor & co were on the wrong side of history, right?
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
|
@surfingthepast.bsky.social
[ View ] |
So basically “we must protect the privileges that Harvard, not to mention I, enjoy above all else. What’s a little freedom compared to that? Also the endowment.”
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Anna Grzymala-Busse
@annagbusse.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Yes, social movements, limits on faculty speech, student protests, wayward faculty, protecting the university, donors, teaching vs activism: it's all a bit too much, and probably why I've now read six different readings of what he meant, just on this site this morning.
0 replies 1 reposts 8 likes
|
Michael Kaplan
@differance.bsky.social
[ View ] |
I didn't find it at all confusing. Campus protests are at issue when they address & antagonize the wrong parties and protected faculty encourage punishable behavior by unprotected students. Some faculty have been sanctioned due to the pressure they invited. Do the rest of us want to invite more?
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes