What Happened at Yale regarding the Halloween Costume Email?
An explosion of victimhood/censorship at Yale regarding a Halloween Costume email is often referenced. This article in Atlantic spells out many of the details.
An explosion of victimhood/censorship at Yale regarding a Halloween Costume email is often referenced. This article in Atlantic spells out many of the details.
I recommend this excellent discussion by Nicholas Christakis on the topics of mob behavior, moral panics, and current threats to free speech. Illiberal behavior is destroying our ability to talk with each other, notably on the places where we would most expect vigorous exchanges of ideas: college campuses. Christakis is a sociologist and physician who conducts research in the area of biosocial science, investigating the biological predicates and consequences of social phenomena. He directs the Human Nature Lab at Yale University. Sam Harris presents this discussion on his Waking Up podcast. At the tail end of the podcast, Christakis and Harris mention the work of Greg Lukianoff, President of FIRE, Foundation for Individual Rights in Education.
The mission of FIRE is to defend and sustain individual rights at America’s colleges and universities. These rights include freedom of speech, legal equality, due process, religious liberty, and sanctity of conscience—the essential qualities of individual liberty and dignity. FIRE’s core mission is to protect the unprotected and to educate the public and communities of concerned Americans about the threats to these rights on our campuses and about the means to preserve them.
FIRE has achieved long successful string of legal victories through its Speech Litigation Project.Donald Trump tells numerous easily disprovable lies: an average of 3 false or misleading claims per day for the first 100 days of his presidency. But his followers don't seem to care. I'm not surprised that this technique of telling numerous bald lies works. I've long thought of these utterances as "tribal truths," and I've seen it all my life, especially in the areas of politics and religion. Today I learned another term for this phenomenon: "Blue Lies."
It's stunningly clear that Melania Trump can't stand Don't Trump, yet she is still married to him. That she is extremely uncomfortable around Donald is increasingly clear from widely available photos and videos of the two of them. And see here. Recent revelations suggest Melania despises Donald and won't sleep with him. Further, Melania has no intention of living in the White House even though it's a big house with a lot of room for the entire family. So why does she stay with him? And why won't she go public with detailed stories about Donald's misconduct and potential illegalities? When Donald Trump married Melania Knauss we know for a fact that he forced her to sign a prenuptial agreement. That agreement is carefully hidden from public view, but we know enough about Trump's love of money and power, as well as his vindictiveness and narcissism, that we can assume that the prenup is laden with incentives to keep Melania well-behaved and quiet. But why limit the legal restrictions to a prenup? There are additional types of contracts that Trump could have foisted on Melania, before or since the wedding. Imagine that you were a psychopath like Trump? What else would you entice Melenia to sign? How about non-disclosure agreements and non-disparagement agreements laden with penalties for whispering even a word about Donald's dirty laundry? The Donald Trump we all know would rig his agreements with Melania so that she would be financially incentivized dress up pretty, quietly stand there to look like a wife but keep her mouth shut. Donald Trump's penalty-filled contracts with Melania, crafted by the best lawyers money can buy, would make sure that Melania would end up destitute if dishes Donald's dirt. None of this is difficult to imagine. What do we need to do to hear Melania's front-row seat stories about Trump's double-dealing, lying, betrayals and illegalities? What if we set up a "Free Melania!" GoFundMe page? What if we raised enough money for Melania to share copies of the contracts Donald made her sign? What if we raised so much money that even a gold-digger like Melania would have enough money to live on after she files the divorce papers and tells all?
Glenn Greenwald set forth 5 principles in this article on The Intercept. The article includes a video discussion with Chris Hayes. One of the principles is this:
Last night, I was on Chris Hayes’s show (video below) discussing the Podesta email leak and made this point, and some people reacted as though this were some bizarre, exotic claim — rather than what it is: the fundamental principle of journalism as well the basis of numerous laws. Of course it’s the case that the more power someone has, the less privacy they have, and every media outlet, literally every day, operates on that principle, as do multiple sectors of law. That there are different standards of privacy for different people based on their power and position is axiomatic. That’s why laws like FOIA requiring disclosure (including of emails) apply only to public officials but not to private citizens: It embraces the proposition that those who wield public power submit to greater transparency than private citizens do. This same principle is why people cheered when the NYT published Trump’s tax return even though they’d be horrified if the NYT published the tax return of ordinary citizens — because people like Trump who wield or seek great political power sacrifice some degree of privacy.Here are the five principles Greenwald sets forth: 1. A source’s motives are irrelevant in deciding whether to publish 2. Journalists constantly publish material that is stolen or illegally obtained. 3. The more public power someone has, the less privacy they are entitled to claim 4. Whether something is “shocking” or “earth-shattering” is an irrelevant standard 5. All journalists are arbiters of privacy and gatekeepers of information