I wish I could say that this is a complicated issue, but to me, it is not. If a group of white nationalist students marched around the campus shouting, “blacks must die “ or “genocide to gays,” it would take less than one second for people to understand that this is not just speech, but threatens physical violence. It speaks volumes that some very fine university presidents have been unable to understand that point when it comes to calls for “genocide,” which, in English, means murder of everyone in a particular group.
Exactly Mike!!! This is definitely not a case of FREE SPEECH! It’s ridiculous that we all know you can’t scream fire in a movie theater when there isn’t any and use Free Speech as your defense. How is it possible to promote GENOCIDE and hide behind the skirts of Free Speech???
I am thinking the same thing, Mike. What is this 'special' category called political speech when calling for the murder of an entire group of people? I may be looking at this naively, but I don't see the difference between Simon's example of going to his neighbor's house and threatening to kill them. Jews, like gay people, Black people, etc. are not an idea - they are actual living breathing people who are a part of the fabric of our society. (Who, BTW, have an actual real history of being murdered en masse for who they are.) I don't see a tension between free speech and calling for the genocide of any marginalized group. I must be missing a point so fine I can't see it.
I agree that calling for genocide is not protected speech. But I wonder how one ought to deal with chants such as “From the River to the sea”, which to my ears implicitly call for the elimination of the Jewish state and certainly many Jews, but which does not sound that way to others--maybe especially younger people who don’t remember Palestinian language about pushing Jews/Israel into the sea.
Yes, of course. Of course. There is no fiercer critic of the current Israeli government than me, but it's outrageous if genocide against Jews is not condemned loudly and immediately.
For Liz Magill and the other University presidents they get a thank you for changing their position after the fact, but not a pass. An educated professional leader should have been able to answer the simple questions presented to her. This is not an “I forgot my homework moment.” Her responses were shameful.
Hey Simon, I have not seen you mention it but it might be worth adding to your list that Biden is currently on tract to have the fewest Layoffs and Discharges of any Presidential term since the Fed started keeping records. (At least as far as I can tell)
I think layoff data might mean more to people than some other measures. Everyone knows someone who has been laid off and can see how devastating that is to people and communities. I know that some people point to insecurity in the job market long term, as a reason for economic uncertainty. More knowledge of the Layoff data being at historic lows might be an easy to show and feel measure.
It might also resonate more than something like Unemployment because it is a confusing measure that sometimes goes up in good times and down in bad.
Free Speech, as protected by the first amendment, has been gutted by the abhorrent behavior of Donald Trump. He and his many minions have destroyed the seemingly clear guard rails erected around this particular freedom. University presidents are struggling with how to address the ugliness bubbling up on their campuses. President, Santa Ono at the University of Michigan is exactly in the same position. Simon, could you please thoroughly review, once again for us, the plain language of the first amendment, as well as the legal protections against dangerous and illegal speech? Thank you.
During the Cold War being a Communist was effectively outlawed despite being supposedly protected political speech. As a nation we can put reasonable limits on speech that has a high likelihood to incite or glorify violence, which should include that from Nazis and the Klan. The slippery slope argument is thrown around too much and I think we’re all smart enough to thread the needle between protecting legitimate political dissent and stopping literal Nazis.
Free speech issues are tough and complex, so I thought I would give the University President Liz Magill the benefit of the doubt, thinking that she could have been responding to a question that was nuanced. I watched a bit of the university presidents' testimony, in particular the questioning by Rep Elise Stefanik (who, ironies of ironies, cannot find the courage to hold TFG accountable for his own inciteful violent speech, but I digress). Stefanik was pretty condescending (and, dare I say, bullying) to the witnesses throughout the hearing, IMO, but the question she asked was clear. "Does calling for the genocide of Jews violate Penn's rules or code of conduct?" No nuance really about it. One explanation for Magill's response is that she was being overly cautious and giving a "context matters" response usually works with free speech. But I would think "calls for genocide" should pretty clearly violate any university's code of conduct.
Simon, I would love to get your take (in a future column) on the GOP retirements (aka desertions?) from the House. I read that another GOP house congressman accepted a position in academia which requires him to resign from Congress before the end of the term. (His name escapes me at the moment). Then of course there is McCarthy pouting and taking his marbles home of the end of the year instead of the end of the term, as I was expecting.
I also read that one of the declared GOP candidates for George Santos' house seat, Philip Sean Grillo, was found guilty of five charges in the Jan 6th insurrection. just when you thought they couldn't dig any deeper in thate barrel....
I read also today that the CEO of Home Depot will support Trump even if he's convicted. I'm worried about corporations not supporting our Constitution and our democracy. I'm very happy also for Mrs Cox’s ruling in favor of her abortion!!!
I have been boycotting HD for several years since I discovered the CEO was a big Trump donor. Fortunately here in NC there is a Lowe's Home Improvement store less than a mile from every HD. The closest ones to me are literally just across the street from each other.
Simon, 🙏 for your thoughtful comments on campus anti-semitism and free speech. What the college presidents’ said is true: calls for ethnic genocide divorced from specific threats or actions are protected by the first amendment and as such do not violate their schools’ codes of conduct.
The presidents’ conceit is in the implication that permitted speech is consequence-free on campus. Academia is not today, nor has it ever been, an unfettered marketplace of ideas. Universities have always selected faculty and students in part based on belief. More recently, they have placed many, many guardrails on speech in the service of inclusion.
Acknowledging that it regulates speech would force academia to critically examine its choices and their consequences. Why are explicit calls for the elimination of the Jewish state tolerable where use of birth-assigned pronouns is verboten? Let’s bring the assumptions and goals behind these choices into the light, celebrating those that withstand scrutiny.
One final thought. President Biden’s clear and courageous statements and actions since the October 7th attacks stopped discussion of this issue from being one more hyper-partisan yelling match. Thank you, Mr. President, for your unequivocal and non-partisan support of Israel’s self-determination. You are in this case the grown up, and we are lucky for your leadership.
"Is there any political speech in America that is a direct threat of death to a particular group here? " I think people wearing KKK regalia counts. I suspect my African American friends feel as threatened by that as my Jewish friends feel seeing people in Nazi outfits.
Regarding the economic stats you have noted Simon, I believe that swing voters are turned off when Democrats take credit for the jobs that returned in 2021. Those jobs would have come back regardless of who was in office, and everyone understands that. 2022/23...Those are Joe/Dem jobs for sure. Another turn off is saddling DJT with the pandemic job losses. If we are 1% disingenuous in our arguments, we lose people. The fair playing field in my view, starting with Obama, is to start with O in 2010, DJT gets the first three years of his tenure, and Joe gets 2022 forward. Dems still destroy Reps easily and we gain credibility when we present the argument this way.
How many Americans know that O created 8mm jobs in his last three years vs. only 6mm for T in his first three? I have the under at 10%. Let's form a national plan th change that! GCO
1) here we try to separate what is true from what people believe. The stats I cite are just facts, truth. How we sell and discuss them is another matter. I try very hard to ground all of our work in objective data of all kinds, something deeply important when fighting an extremist movement not at all grounded in truth.
2) it is not true for example that jobs went away during COVID and came back when it eased. That jobs went away under Trump was based on his historic mismanagement of the pandemic; that they came back under Biden as fast as they did was due to health and economic policy choices. Economies don’t just recover on their own from crisis; they have to brought back. See the graph in my post today about how long it has taken for US to recover from recent recessions. This idea that Biden deserves no credit for the recovery of those jobs is in economic policy terms bullshit.
3) here we work from data. If you “think” swing voters are turned off by us citing this data share the study that shows that. I don’t know of any, and in fact I’ve written extensively here about data that has been replicated in a variety of public and private polls that finds that when people are informed of how well the economy has done under Biden his numbers go up.
Thanks for this Simon, and points taken. We are pulling in the same direction. My jobs numbers are facts, I make the adjustments I do there in an attempt to "give" something in the debate. As you strongly suggest, maybe we don't need to be doing that.
Yes, my swing voter analysis in anecdotal, and yes we can pull them in if we can get them informed. GOC
I’m late to comment here, but the Texas abortion ruling seems to be very significant in undermining the belief that “anti-abortion” is “pro-life”. It also seem to be excellent “future lawsuit” basis for arguing for full abortion access / let a pregnant person make the best choice for their life. How much time and money did the woman have to spend to “get Texas to allow the abortion she needed”? How many resources did Texas have to spend to stop this woman from freely making the logical choice for her life, reproductive future, and family of existing, wanted and cared for children? Why should any pregnant person have to shoulder this oppression and prohibition of liberty? Why does the State of Texas get to dictate her reproductive health choice? It was the luck of the draw that this pregnant woman had her case decided by a judge that showed a modicum of humanity. Most abortion seeking Texans are not that lucky. They are little uteruses owned by the State. Yet this decision belies the falseness of the whole “pro-life” movement. Abortion is necessary Reproductive Healthcare
I most heartedly agree!
Hi.... Where is the link to RSVP for the event on December 13? I don't see it anywhere.
Thank you....Martha Cohen Roe in Seattle
it's at the top of the email, and you can also find info about our events on the site itself, under upcoming events, or here - https://www.hopiumchronicles.com/p/upcoming-events-paid-subscriber-hang
Thanks so much! I didn't see it because the lettering was in very light blue and was listed with the other items. I did just register.
I wish I could say that this is a complicated issue, but to me, it is not. If a group of white nationalist students marched around the campus shouting, “blacks must die “ or “genocide to gays,” it would take less than one second for people to understand that this is not just speech, but threatens physical violence. It speaks volumes that some very fine university presidents have been unable to understand that point when it comes to calls for “genocide,” which, in English, means murder of everyone in a particular group.
Exactly Mike!!! This is definitely not a case of FREE SPEECH! It’s ridiculous that we all know you can’t scream fire in a movie theater when there isn’t any and use Free Speech as your defense. How is it possible to promote GENOCIDE and hide behind the skirts of Free Speech???
I am thinking the same thing, Mike. What is this 'special' category called political speech when calling for the murder of an entire group of people? I may be looking at this naively, but I don't see the difference between Simon's example of going to his neighbor's house and threatening to kill them. Jews, like gay people, Black people, etc. are not an idea - they are actual living breathing people who are a part of the fabric of our society. (Who, BTW, have an actual real history of being murdered en masse for who they are.) I don't see a tension between free speech and calling for the genocide of any marginalized group. I must be missing a point so fine I can't see it.
I agree that calling for genocide is not protected speech. But I wonder how one ought to deal with chants such as “From the River to the sea”, which to my ears implicitly call for the elimination of the Jewish state and certainly many Jews, but which does not sound that way to others--maybe especially younger people who don’t remember Palestinian language about pushing Jews/Israel into the sea.
Yes, of course. Of course. There is no fiercer critic of the current Israeli government than me, but it's outrageous if genocide against Jews is not condemned loudly and immediately.
For Liz Magill and the other University presidents they get a thank you for changing their position after the fact, but not a pass. An educated professional leader should have been able to answer the simple questions presented to her. This is not an “I forgot my homework moment.” Her responses were shameful.
Hey Simon, I have not seen you mention it but it might be worth adding to your list that Biden is currently on tract to have the fewest Layoffs and Discharges of any Presidential term since the Fed started keeping records. (At least as far as I can tell)
I think layoff data might mean more to people than some other measures. Everyone knows someone who has been laid off and can see how devastating that is to people and communities. I know that some people point to insecurity in the job market long term, as a reason for economic uncertainty. More knowledge of the Layoff data being at historic lows might be an easy to show and feel measure.
It might also resonate more than something like Unemployment because it is a confusing measure that sometimes goes up in good times and down in bad.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/JTSLDL
Will look into it, and thanks for bringing to me attention!
Free Speech, as protected by the first amendment, has been gutted by the abhorrent behavior of Donald Trump. He and his many minions have destroyed the seemingly clear guard rails erected around this particular freedom. University presidents are struggling with how to address the ugliness bubbling up on their campuses. President, Santa Ono at the University of Michigan is exactly in the same position. Simon, could you please thoroughly review, once again for us, the plain language of the first amendment, as well as the legal protections against dangerous and illegal speech? Thank you.
During the Cold War being a Communist was effectively outlawed despite being supposedly protected political speech. As a nation we can put reasonable limits on speech that has a high likelihood to incite or glorify violence, which should include that from Nazis and the Klan. The slippery slope argument is thrown around too much and I think we’re all smart enough to thread the needle between protecting legitimate political dissent and stopping literal Nazis.
Free speech issues are tough and complex, so I thought I would give the University President Liz Magill the benefit of the doubt, thinking that she could have been responding to a question that was nuanced. I watched a bit of the university presidents' testimony, in particular the questioning by Rep Elise Stefanik (who, ironies of ironies, cannot find the courage to hold TFG accountable for his own inciteful violent speech, but I digress). Stefanik was pretty condescending (and, dare I say, bullying) to the witnesses throughout the hearing, IMO, but the question she asked was clear. "Does calling for the genocide of Jews violate Penn's rules or code of conduct?" No nuance really about it. One explanation for Magill's response is that she was being overly cautious and giving a "context matters" response usually works with free speech. But I would think "calls for genocide" should pretty clearly violate any university's code of conduct.
Simon, I would love to get your take (in a future column) on the GOP retirements (aka desertions?) from the House. I read that another GOP house congressman accepted a position in academia which requires him to resign from Congress before the end of the term. (His name escapes me at the moment). Then of course there is McCarthy pouting and taking his marbles home of the end of the year instead of the end of the term, as I was expecting.
I also read that one of the declared GOP candidates for George Santos' house seat, Philip Sean Grillo, was found guilty of five charges in the Jan 6th insurrection. just when you thought they couldn't dig any deeper in thate barrel....
I read also today that the CEO of Home Depot will support Trump even if he's convicted. I'm worried about corporations not supporting our Constitution and our democracy. I'm very happy also for Mrs Cox’s ruling in favor of her abortion!!!
I have been boycotting HD for several years since I discovered the CEO was a big Trump donor. Fortunately here in NC there is a Lowe's Home Improvement store less than a mile from every HD. The closest ones to me are literally just across the street from each other.
Ty very much. I’ll go to Lowe’s here in my state of Florida from now on.
Simon, 🙏 for your thoughtful comments on campus anti-semitism and free speech. What the college presidents’ said is true: calls for ethnic genocide divorced from specific threats or actions are protected by the first amendment and as such do not violate their schools’ codes of conduct.
The presidents’ conceit is in the implication that permitted speech is consequence-free on campus. Academia is not today, nor has it ever been, an unfettered marketplace of ideas. Universities have always selected faculty and students in part based on belief. More recently, they have placed many, many guardrails on speech in the service of inclusion.
Acknowledging that it regulates speech would force academia to critically examine its choices and their consequences. Why are explicit calls for the elimination of the Jewish state tolerable where use of birth-assigned pronouns is verboten? Let’s bring the assumptions and goals behind these choices into the light, celebrating those that withstand scrutiny.
One final thought. President Biden’s clear and courageous statements and actions since the October 7th attacks stopped discussion of this issue from being one more hyper-partisan yelling match. Thank you, Mr. President, for your unequivocal and non-partisan support of Israel’s self-determination. You are in this case the grown up, and we are lucky for your leadership.
Hi Sheila I'm following you back. From what I’m reading I also campuses are in trouble. And I’m glad you contacted Mr Rosenberg about this. Ty
Thanks
"Is there any political speech in America that is a direct threat of death to a particular group here? " I think people wearing KKK regalia counts. I suspect my African American friends feel as threatened by that as my Jewish friends feel seeing people in Nazi outfits.
Regarding the economic stats you have noted Simon, I believe that swing voters are turned off when Democrats take credit for the jobs that returned in 2021. Those jobs would have come back regardless of who was in office, and everyone understands that. 2022/23...Those are Joe/Dem jobs for sure. Another turn off is saddling DJT with the pandemic job losses. If we are 1% disingenuous in our arguments, we lose people. The fair playing field in my view, starting with Obama, is to start with O in 2010, DJT gets the first three years of his tenure, and Joe gets 2022 forward. Dems still destroy Reps easily and we gain credibility when we present the argument this way.
How many Americans know that O created 8mm jobs in his last three years vs. only 6mm for T in his first three? I have the under at 10%. Let's form a national plan th change that! GCO
Greg, a few things:
1) here we try to separate what is true from what people believe. The stats I cite are just facts, truth. How we sell and discuss them is another matter. I try very hard to ground all of our work in objective data of all kinds, something deeply important when fighting an extremist movement not at all grounded in truth.
2) it is not true for example that jobs went away during COVID and came back when it eased. That jobs went away under Trump was based on his historic mismanagement of the pandemic; that they came back under Biden as fast as they did was due to health and economic policy choices. Economies don’t just recover on their own from crisis; they have to brought back. See the graph in my post today about how long it has taken for US to recover from recent recessions. This idea that Biden deserves no credit for the recovery of those jobs is in economic policy terms bullshit.
3) here we work from data. If you “think” swing voters are turned off by us citing this data share the study that shows that. I don’t know of any, and in fact I’ve written extensively here about data that has been replicated in a variety of public and private polls that finds that when people are informed of how well the economy has done under Biden his numbers go up.
Welcome to Hopium. Simon
Thanks for this Simon, and points taken. We are pulling in the same direction. My jobs numbers are facts, I make the adjustments I do there in an attempt to "give" something in the debate. As you strongly suggest, maybe we don't need to be doing that.
Yes, my swing voter analysis in anecdotal, and yes we can pull them in if we can get them informed. GOC
I’m late to comment here, but the Texas abortion ruling seems to be very significant in undermining the belief that “anti-abortion” is “pro-life”. It also seem to be excellent “future lawsuit” basis for arguing for full abortion access / let a pregnant person make the best choice for their life. How much time and money did the woman have to spend to “get Texas to allow the abortion she needed”? How many resources did Texas have to spend to stop this woman from freely making the logical choice for her life, reproductive future, and family of existing, wanted and cared for children? Why should any pregnant person have to shoulder this oppression and prohibition of liberty? Why does the State of Texas get to dictate her reproductive health choice? It was the luck of the draw that this pregnant woman had her case decided by a judge that showed a modicum of humanity. Most abortion seeking Texans are not that lucky. They are little uteruses owned by the State. Yet this decision belies the falseness of the whole “pro-life” movement. Abortion is necessary Reproductive Healthcare