Why are college kids so against conservative speakers?

Not only that but kids have to sneak in because entrances are blocked, professors are trying to stop it.

@SergeantQueen: “What’s wrong about learning another viewpoint and questioning it?”

People are well aware of Milo and Ben’s views. They don’t need to have them come and spout their horseshit and listen quietly while scratching their chins. In what way would Milo doxing trans students provide anything educational to students?

Milo’s efforts have been publicity stunts meant to paint schools as bastions of liberal intolerance. And to some degree, his stunt may have worked – but only for those that have never been to college.

There has been serious debate among the left and liberals whether to just let Milo have his little fun or go down there and beat the shit out of Nazis. But it’s a matter of strategy.

Milo and Ben or David Duke or Richard Spencer have nothing to teach, and we already understand their point of view completely. And it’s backwards, revolting, obvious, and boring.

It’s like a bad movie where you know what the ending’s going to be from the trailer. You don’t have to waste your time on a dumpster-fire of backwards ideology. Should they be banned? No. Is it ok for people to peacefully protest? ...of course.

“Peaceful” hahaha

And Ben and Milo are the best speakers

They’re intentionally inflammatory, it’s what differentiates them from all the other people with the same views. It’s how they sell themselves and make their money, it’s literally showmanship.

They get upset when people respond in kind. They encourage the view that they’ve owned, destroyed, and savaged the other side, but then make a show of wondering why people are so darn mean to them. “Awwww shucks, just trying to get the message out.”

People protest because they’re internet tough guys who spit vile slanted “hot takes” and run for cover when challenged. So they invite challenge in person.

“Evil must be opposed.” – Vedek Yassim
“Extremism in the defense of freedom is no vice” – Barry Goldwater.

@SergeantQueen: ”“Peaceful” hahaha”

How familiar are you with Antifa? You might want to do a little research here.

@SergeantQueen: “And Ben and Milo are the best speakers”

Do you suspect that people don’t know who these people are and don’t have access to the internet? These are people with huge platforms.

Ask yourself how much you really know about what goes on at colleges and universities, and why you have been taught about this. Are Milo and others being presented as victims here, or are you concerned about the education people are receiving at a university?

This is a public stunt meant to get you worked up. Consider yourself played and do a little reading.

Your quotes are irrelevant @ragingloli no need to bring them up.
And yes Antifa. A leftist violent extremist group what is your point?

“Consider yourself played”? They provide facts. I’m not being played.

They could hardly be more relevant.

Doubtful

@SergeantQueen: ”@thisismyusername: Ask yourself how much you really know about what goes on at colleges and universities,”

Since you’re not going to ask yourself this question, I’ll ask you directly: How much do you know about what goes on at colleges and universities? Is the Milo stunt the extent of it? If so, this should concern you. Of course these stunts were targeting you. They certainly weren’t targeting people who’ve been to college.

Let me ask you another question. You state that Milo and Ben are the best speakers. Great. What can someone learn about them at a talk that they can’t from having access to them for years via the internet, youtube, etc? Please be specific.

@SergeantQueen – maybe a question for you then. Is there anything you can think of that you would protest? Why?

I’d be happy to discuss the facts that you’ve learned from Ben and Milo that weren’t already known, where should we start?

You know the “fa” in anti-fa means fascist, yes?

No surprise that conservatives are upset by them.

Last I checked there were not armies of conservatives doing everything in their power to shut down the free speech of liberal speakers. Milo is a professional troll, he knows exactly what to say to get the left up in arms and the right behind him. He does however outline the fact that the right are not generally “bigots” but have different ideas and simply sharing them is all it generally takes to be accepted on the right. Milo in his trolling underlines some of the hypocracy on the left. Ben on the other hand just has several views the left disagree on. He does not appear to be a Troll. Either way, the type of free speech shut down that the younger generation on the left attempt to do runs couter to what it should mean to be liberal. It’s disgusting to watch, almost as much as seeing nazis on the alt-right march and protest their flavor of hate. Political extremes that lead to this kind of hate and controversy is cancer.

@SergeantQueen And all of that is fair (whether I agree with it or not). So in the future can you present your opinions that way rather than go on a toxic rant about trans people and mentally ill people? You claim in your question that you consider learning about different viewpoints to be a virtue, so if you want to be taken seriously, then you won’t back yourself into a corner where you can be dismissed as a hateful, ignorant person. Having conservative opinions that are worth debating and sharing is a far cry from insulting the people you disagree with.

Watch what Steven Crowder did on AntiFa. He basically did an undercover mission thing and they were selling the person undercover guns and stuff. They aren’t a good group and yes, just as bad as fascists. Both suppress other views and use violence.

People aren’t owed platforms simply for being contrarian, simply for having an opposing perspective. Their perspective has to have value and merit on its own standing. Milo’s entire platform is to be contrarian. It garners him a lot of attention, and people who dislike those he attacks take some sort of enjoyment out of the antics, I guess.

This idea is something the media has typically gotten wrong, for example, in climate change discussions. They have treated it as a debate between equally represented sides, despite only one of the sides having an overwhelming mass of evidence and peer consensus behind it, and in doing so, they actually present a distorted representation of the issue.

Context matters. Credibility matters. Having a legitimate viewpoint that challenges status quo ideas is not the same thing as realizing you can get a lot of attention by simply being shocking.

Yet despite that, the students and professors at Berkeley did accept and support the idea that Milo was going to be speaking at the campus. While the rest of the country was up in arms about the riot, and leaping over each other to see who could most quickly blame it on colleges and liberals, professors and brainwashed students, Bay Area locals knew—from being there, or from word of mouth, or from the reports by local news—that the students and teachers didn’t support the vandalism. Many of them also didn’t support the cancelling of Milo’s speech—thinking the school was being overly cautious in its assessment of the danger posed by the rioters to Milo, students, and staff. (And no, this wasn’t just the conservative students. This was the vast majority of students and professors… but that isn’t as salacious a story, so it didn’t get the same representation across the country as the riot did.)

Probably for the same reason so many of them are Agnostic or Atheist: education! Not that conservatives are uneducated, but it makes one wonder…

@SergeantQueen, I hope that when you attend college you don’t walk around believing that everyone who have viewpoints different, or perhaps left, of your own is somehow brainwashed. It seems like a closed-off way of viewing the experience, an experience where you’ll be able to be in contact with people that have all sorts of different perspectives and all sorts of different life stories. It also seems a bit of a contradictory stance, given your main contention in this discussion is that people at college don’t practice listening to others with differing perspectives.

College is a great time to challenge and question your own perspectives, because you have so much ready access to information, scholars, and fellow 18–20 year olds studying alongside you with their own backgrounds and perspectives. If nothing else, you’ll be able to make your own perspectives more nuanced and well-informed.

I would also suggest, @SergeantQueen, that you do some more research before being so sure about the opinions (or is it intolerance?) you hold about transgender people. You don’t know as much about it as you think you do, and the opinions you’re expressing are more than ignorant—they’re harmful.

The disillusioned young person whose mind is opened by Steven Crowder/Sargon of Akkad/Ben Shapiro, et al. is the new version of the college kid who takes Psych 101 and “understands the world now”. I’m not implying that you’re doing anything wrong by listening to these people and their opinions (I welcome much of what they say), but they and their YouTube videos don’t represent all that is worth knowing. There’s more to the modern American political situation than their ant-SJW rhetoric and their “4chan conservative” followers. Theirs is a new political box that people put themselves in, lashing out at anyone who opposes them and refusing to hear their arguments. It’s a different side of the same coin. It’s not something transcendent, even though it seems that way given the dominance of liberal opinions in the mainstream media. Of course the other side of that coin (the “SJW”s) is no more appealing, no less myopic, and they help push people toward the “alt-right”, but that’s the problem. As long as we reduce political discussion to labeling everyone who disagrees with us as evil and brainwashed and shutting down possible discussion, we’re just going to become more divided, more extreme, and less happy.

Just saying.

Extremists on both sides are dumb

Last I checked there were not armies of conservatives doing everything in their power to shut down the free speech of liberal speakers

You mean armies like the Nazis with torches in Charlottesville chanting “The Jews Will Not Replace Us!”

Or the campaign event crowds that Donald Trump encouraged to beat protestors?

Or the audience that booed and jeered Mona Charen at CPAC a few days ago for suggesting Roy Moore and Donald Trump are not moral role models?

Armies like that?

I haven’t read the whole thread, and I’m not familiar with Ben Shapiro.

But I know Milo. And frankly, there’s a distinction that needs to be drawn between someone who is merely an opposing viewpoint, and someone who is downright dangerous. During some of his speeches, Milo has publicly outed closeted trans students. This is an action that puts those students in direct danger (hate crimes, bullying, suicide risk). This is not OK.

I am fine with listening to a speech that I disagree with. I will vigorously oppose a speech that directly puts other humans in danger.

Because you can’t brainwash people who refuse to listen to any viewpoints that differ from their own. There’s no other reason NOT to listen to other people who believe differently than you. I have studied many religions and it didn’t hurt me at all, although many people bash my bible and many christians bash the Quran, I read them both. That’s how that works.

I’m not sure why I’m back here.

There is a misconception among those that have not been to college that college students are protected (somehow) from opposing viewpoints. They have no idea what college is, and how education works, so it makes sense that they would be susceptible to these efforts by the right to create the impression that the university is a threat. If people spend years studying and come away with a more nuanced understanding of the world, then this means that they have been brainwashed.

I have first-hand experience with this confusion, as my father was hesitant for me to go to college because he had heard that it creates liberals. Well, I was a socialist before I went to college, and still one after. We had discussions during college and many years later, and he was convinced that the downfall of civilization was due to education.

My father is not a stupid man. But he never went to college, served in Vietnam, and felt betrayed by anti-war protests, which he interpreted as anti-soldier protests. He drifted toward the right, which is the easy path, and ended up having his entire world view shaped by right-wing media.

@SergeantQueen is young (maybe), and I really hope she is able to step out of the bubble and learn. It’s difficult to listen to people who’ve never set foot on a college campus describe it as though they are scientists who have been studying the university for years. And when asked to back up their absurd claims, referencing Crowder or other clowns is just depressing. There’s a reason people who have been to college don’t listen to Crowder, and it’s not due to ideological differences. It’s the fact that it’s embarrassing, infantile, incorrect propaganda designed for people who do not know any better.

I don’t listen to Stephen Crowder. Never have. His exposure on Antifa is still very informative and true. Doesn’t matter what you think of him, this is raw fact and insight on Antifa. Which is the only reason why I brought him up. I don’t think it’s propaganda or embarrassing. I consider the feminists and multi gender people to be embarrassing. They are the people I am going to have to explain to my children.
And I’m 17.

Sorry bout this thread, guys. Probably should’ve just shut up haha.

It’s modded now, but you said something to the effect that when you attended college, it wouldn’t brainwash you like it does others.

And that wasn’t calling you guys brainwashed.

[Mod says] This thread is in General. It’s not about feminism or transgender rights. Please try to answer the question as asked.

Since this thread is being modded in an attempt to keep it on track, I want to try one more thing here…

@SergeantQueen: “The case at Berkely was liberals beating on people who wanted to see Milo.”

^ First, you stated that liberals were beating on Milo. Then, you admitted that it was likely Antifa. Many of us who have commented here have gone to college and are trying to express to you that your understanding of what goes on there is inaccurate – and intentionally so.

Like I have said many times, it’s not your fault that you have been served up this narrative. But it’s now up to you to challenge it. Put it to the test. Read some other perspectives, take some advice from people who have been to college, and maybe even…withhold judgement on the university and free speech until you attend there. You stated that will be attending college. At 17, you’ve likely already been accepted and are making your plans. Try to be critical of your preconceptions. Who knows – maybe they will withstand the scrutiny. But you’ll never know until you try.

I’m not going to challenge anything. I believe everything I’ve said. 100%. I stand by it no matter how many people claim I’m wrong or what to hate on me. I don’t care
And I didn’t state it was likely antifa that did it and even if I did, Antifa is made up of liberals….so same thing.

@SergeantQueen: “I’m not going to challenge anything. I believe everything I’ve said. 100%. I stand by it no matter how many people claim I’m wrong or what to hate on me. I don’t care”

Ummm….why would you go to college then? You know everything you need to know now. You’ll never have to crack a book or learn anything else. I have to admit that I’ve never heard such an admission.

@SergeantQueen: “And I didn’t state it was likely antifa that did it and even if I did, Antifa is made up of liberals….so same thing.”

Antifa is not made up of liberals. You’re following up one inaccurate/incorrect statement with another.

Oh my god. You were telling me to go against what my views are. I said I’m not doing that.

“Like I have said many times, it’s not your fault that you have been served up this narrative. But it’s now up to you to challenge it.” I don’t get what you mean.

@thisismyusername Just a heads up, you are sounding very condescending to this young woman. She can believe anything she wants, right or wrong. You are not the arbiter of truth in life, no one is, and if you want to educate someone, they have to want it.

How is it not true the antifa is made up of liberals. What conservative is apart of antifa?

Liberals are not everyone who is not conservative. There are more groups than just liberal and conservative.

@SergeantQueen: “Oh my god. You were telling me to go against what my views are. I said I’m not doing that.”

That’s precisely what learning is. You challenge every single thing that you “know” (or think you know), and you put it to the test, repeatedly. I asked you to learn. That’s all.

@SergeantQueen: “How is it not true the antifa is made up of liberals. What conservative is apart of antifa?”

Liberals are generally considered centrists. They are usually pro-capitalist but “left” on social issues.

Do a Google search for Antifa to find out who they are. (Liberals generally hate Antifa.)

@SargeantQueen The difference is that the Right believes everyone is guaranteed free speech, but these folks take it to a whole other level, so not many agree with them.

Wiki
They tend to be anti-capitalist[9] and they are predominantly far-left and militant left,[10][5] which includes anarchists, communists and socialists.[11][12][13][14] Their stated focus is on fighting far-right and white supremacist ideologies directly, rather than politically.[5]

Antifa actions have been subject to criticism from Republicans, Democrats and political commentators in the U.S. media.[64][65][66] House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi condemned the violence of “Antifa” activists in Berkeley on August 29, 2017.[67] Conservative talk show host and Fox News contributor Laura Ingraham suggested labeling antifa as a terrorist organization

They are still far left. Soooo

@SergeantQueen: “They are still far left. Soooo”

Details, shmetails….

@SergeantQueen You should have a look at the Political Compass. It’s more complicated than right and left.

“What’s wrong with learning another viewpoint and questioning it? Why do they just shut it off completely?

Why do the very same people who preach tolerance of peoples views, lifestyles, and individuality act so intolerant of peoples views, lifestyles, and individuality, when those views and such don’t match what they agree with?”

(applause)
I actually agree with @SergeantQueen 100%.

You HAVE to be able to listen, try to understand, then accept or reject an idea of way of thinking. The infighting and aggression here has already cost members of the site, perhaps some of you should rethink your approach to questions like these in less aggressive manner.

@SergeantQueen – Re: @gorillapaws Political Compass link. For example, here is where the candidates in the last election fall.

Here is mine.

“There is a misconception among those that have not been to college that college students are protected (somehow) from opposing viewpoints”

There is some of this especially in liberal arts. Conservative viewpoints are usually not tolerated. I have a few degrees, been in all kinds of classes from social justice to modern physics and up to 600 level engineering. There was a clear left wing political spin on things depending on your instructor. A couple exceptions where I had a conservative Lit instructor and one in western civ. The majority of them in arts and sciences were far left. In technical courses it was generally apolitical and impartial as college should be but often is not. Don’t get me wrong, a college education is of critical importance but I never appreciated blatant attemps by liberal professors to indoctrinate young minds.

@ARE_you_kidding_me My sister was a TA before she got her Ph.D. She had a conservative creationist who disagreed with what he was being taught in his Biology 101 class. Is it “indoctrination” to give them an F if they insist on factually inaccurate positions on their coursework?

That wasn’t my experience in undergrad, nor is it my experience in grad school, and I’ve taken primarily liberal arts classes (since those were my primary areas of study). Professors had any number of varying opinions on issues within the same department, worked carefully to delineate their interpretation from the rest of the content (as best as possible, while also reminding us that they wouldn’t be perfect in that), and were delighted when a student would present a point of disagreement. They loved the act of an intellectual discussion, they loved being challenged by ideas they hadn’t considered, and they loved encouraging that kind of intellectual engagement from students. They would also challenge students to substantiate their thinking at a collegiate level, and would point out when students failed to do so. (And they were all actually quite hungry for more of this kind of engagement from students.) All incredibly valuable lessons.

I’m not saying professors are above critique, or that all professors are the same.

I also know that my own experience is merely anecdotal.

But there it is.

If you’re already to the left politically it’s much harder to see but there was no problem seeing that conservative viewpoints were vastly under represented outside of STEM and perhaps buisiness where there is not as much enrollment by % of student population. This is coming from someone who is somewhat apolitical. I would have probably dropped the creationists class myself and taken biology from a different prof. Such a core, fundamental course needs to be factually based without that sort of bias even if very subtle.

There’s a difference between saying there aren’t enough conservative professors in a given university and saying that liberal or left-leaning professors are “indoctrinating” their students into believing what they believe. My point was to the latter.

I also disagree with your assessment that I can’t see political slant in things simply because I’m liberal or left-leaning, but I guess that’s a personal opinion and another matter altogether.

@ARE_you_kidding_me I’m sorry if my post was unclear. My sister was the TA of the class (which was fact-based), it was a conservative student in her class that was complaining. I was trying to understand if this scenario would be included in the “indoctrination” of conservatives that you were mentioning earlier?

I remember back when I was a geology major that we had a young earth creationist in the program. Awkward was hardly the word to use, I would say disruptive. IMO the profs were too accomodating.
In certain contexts this sort of thing should not be allowed to get in the way of the coursework.
Debate discussions were common in liberal arts classes and frankly of moderated impartially were good learning experiences. I had more than a couple experiences where this was not impartial and was certain viewpoints were given more merit even if they were a matter of opinion and not factually based.

@gorillapaws I don’t think when most people speak of “indoctrination” in a university that they’re speaking of biology professors not acknowledging religious doctrine as science. While I’m sure there are some examples of creationists who would label a non-creationist stance from a biology or geology professor as “indoctrination” (as in your example), I would think that to be the exception, not the norm. The problem is probably more apparent in political classes or classes that deal with social issues. Examples from my undergrad experience included classes in Native American studies and Chicano studies that consisted of a lot of railing against white people, presenting a political or social perspective as fact when it’s one of many perspectives. (I wouldn’t expect the same kind of leniency in a science class. Science classes are expected to teach the science. If someone wishes to study creationism, they can do so at a religious institution).

Most of this comes from hearsay; I studied literature and didn’t encounter much anti-conservative bias in the literary world.

(In fact, re. the issue with the Native American studies class, I heard a conflicting account from another friend who said that the professor explicitly stated that she was presenting a perspective and not asking students to agree with it, but merely to show they understand it).

Milo is not a conservative speaker. He’s a trolling attention whore. If he’s what passes for conservatism these days then conservatism is dead.

“Why are college kids so against conservative speakers?”
I don’t know of anyone who is simply “against conservative speakers”.

Ben Shapiro shows up to troll and intentionally provoke anger which he then uses as examples for his preposterous claims that universities brainwash people and so on. It’s grade-school-level bait tactics, and it’s just the beginning of the list of atrocious provocative racist topics he spews. He is not just “a conservative speaker”.

Milo Yiannopoulos is also a disgusting character who panders to borderline-certifiably-insane racist audiences – again, not just “a conservative speaker”.

Not only do both of them deserve to be violently thrown out of just about anyplace, they go to universities with an agenda to generate protests and twist them to generate more grist for their own disgusting hate-mongering swill.

That’s why.

(I believe this is on-topic, more civil than it deserves, etc.)

Wow. Another thread that I wish I could read the moded stuff. I actually read everything that wasn’t (took me a bit.) But I’m not sure if my contribution fit with whatever was removed.

In my opinion, people are uneducated, when they start their college career. As they grow more aware of the actual world in which they live, (not just the opinions of their own family, environment, and/or upbringing,) many liberal ideas make more sense.

Yes. I’m saying that uneducated people are more likely to have conservative values. I really don’t care how that sounds.

So. The more aware people who run, educate, and get educated in a college environment, are less likely to tolerate a person who is just there to be inflammatory.

Open debate, or listening to other views is great. Some views don’t deserve to have a platform. Bigotry, intolerance, hate, racism, anti-homosexuality etc, are not viewpoints that should be debated. They are just plain wrong. No debate required. No viewpoint supporting such things is defensible.

If someone wants to preach such vitriol, they can do it at a KKK rally, or whatever. And they should be happy that the government even allows that cancer to grow…

As for Antifa. It was started in Italy, to openly condemn, and combat the fascists/nazis, that were becoming more public and powerful. Those original Antifa members saw the evil growing, and becoming more acceptable. They saw the division, and hatred being sewn, and acted.

Yes. Violence is the last resort. And yes. Violence was called for. Many survivors of the first, and second World Wars, would lament not having done more to stomp out the fascist movements, before millions of people were killed. The few surviving holocaust victims have been active in recent months warning others about the dangers of Trump’s supporters, and groups such as the alt-right.

A university, is a place of higher learning. History is no longer sugar coated. People learn more about what really is going on. As a result, many start pushing back against real, or perceived injustices.

Milo, and those like him are easily seen for what they are, by many universities. The hate mongerer, and his transparent agenda isn’t welcome in a place of actual learing. We’re all lucky to have smart people running these institutions, and keeping out the trash.

Those who would spread such hate, are deservedly ostracized. As they should be from ALL places. They have NO place in America. Let alone an institute of learning…