The latest anti-liberal rant thread (get your daily dose here)

[chilon]

Ah, so we’re going with disingenuous then. The article not only details exactly what the issue is, why, but responds directly to a letter from the Dean, printed in full. This “rebuttal” is nonsense.

This is a non sequitur but more importantly it was “only” nine student organizations that endorsed it and now “only” one that published it. I suppose “only” one guy wrote it too. Your own source points out the move was widely condemned by Jewish advocacy groups. Is there any question at this point which critique is being dishonest here?

The only thing I see disingenuous about the last three pages are your posts. Do you admit the title is blatantly false and only done for obvious click-bait purposes?

If you wanted to have a good faith discussion, you could have posted any number of articles that just dealt with the facts like the one I posted. Instead you chose to post one with a blatantly false and misleading title. That comes off more disingenuous than anyone else's posts in this thread because you either knew it was false but posted it for sensationalism over facts or you didn't know and don't want to admit you didn't fact check before posting.

And if you care the facts, one student group published the petition. 9 ended up co-signing it out of over 100. Over 90 student groups refused to sign the petition. The Dean criticized it. Jewish law professors criticized it and the University will not be adopting it. So will you admit the title of the article you posted is false?

[Heathen Hammer]

While the article title is somewhat misleading, it does provide an example of rather disturbing racist trend within the pro-establishment left, that seems to be the defining trait of Democrat party supporters.
Then we have the usual bickering between rhino/DNC cultists who project their imaginary identities on each other, while both miss the point entirely.

[Lord Thesaurian]

The only thing I see disingenuous about the last three pages are your posts. Do you admit the title is blatantly false and only done for obvious click-bait purposes?

If you wanted to have a good faith discussion, you could have posted any number of articles that just dealt with the facts like the one I posted. Instead you chose to post one with a blatantly false and misleading title. That comes off more disingenuous than anyone else's posts in this thread because you either knew it was false but posted it for sensationalism over facts or you didn't know and don't want to admit you didn't fact check before posting.

And if you care the facts, one student group published the petition. 9 ended up co-signing it out of over 100. Over 90 student groups refused to sign the petition. The Dean criticized it. Jewish law professors criticized it and the University will not be adopting it. So will you admit the title of the article you posted is false?

More projection and deflection. No, I do not accept your spurious accusation about the article I posted and discussed at length, which includes a factual description of the issue and a letter from the Dean. Pearl clutching over the article’s title is irrelevant. Per the latter: “This sends a clear signal: Jews are not welcome, unless they deny their support for Israel which, for many, is an integral element of Jewish identity.” If you agree with that, then the article’s title is an accurate description of the implications. If not, then your opinion is not a “fact check” lol.

There’s nothing to “fact check” when the article addresses your excuse about students vs school leadership, and again, your own attempted rebuttal acknowledges widespread condemnation from Jewish advocacy groups. You can’t have your cake and eat it too. Either it’s not a problem or the problem was widely condemned. It’s just the latest in a long-standing trend of leftist antisemitism at US universities.

The cognitive dissonance that comes from a life of personal investment in a political tribe that has long since turned against them. Hated by the far right because the “Zionist occupied government” is carrying out “white genocide” while simultaneously held in contempt for their “white privilege” and “white supremacy” by a rapidly mainstreaming far left.

It seems the Jewish misfortune of being scapegoated for societal problems persists, though the “Jews=white” business the left is trying to enforce of late makes about as much sense as the effort to lump in Asian immigrants with whites for purposes of pursuing “racial equity.” It’s a feature of the tilt toward “progressive” authoritarianism:

Antisemitism has been significant in American left-wing movements since their emergence in the nineteenth century. It was, however, much more strident on the far left—in the Communist Party, among Trotskyites, and in the New Left of the late 1960s and early 1970s. In recent decades, antisemitism has penetrated the liberal mainstream and has become normalized.

The left’s view of Jews and its understanding of antisemitism can be traced back to 19th century Marxist and anarchist paradigms. Karl Marx and the leading theoreticians of anarchism, Pierre-Joseph Proudhon and Mikhail Bakunin, depicted Judaism as nakedly materialistic and anti-social. Describing the Jew as an unscrupulous moneylender and petty trader in his essay “On the Jewish Question,” Marx (1844) claimed that “huckstering” was the Jew’s “worldly religion.”

In recent years American universities have become a principal arena for the propagation of antisemitism, intertwined with a virulent anti-Zionism. On many campuses, leftist groups have forged a “Red–Green” alliance with Muslim students—many of them reactionaries—to demonize Israel, often using antisemitic imagery and invective. The alliance aggressively propagandizes on campus, usually with the support of Middle East Studies programs.

In the decades after the Vietnam War, many New Left ideas took root among mainstream liberals. Antisemitism became inextricably intertwined with anti-Zionism. The two-millennia-old deicide accusation was secularized, with the Jewish state now charged with genocide against innocent Palestinian Arabs (Pollack, 2017). It has become fashionable on the left, and increasingly in the liberal mainstream, to demonize democratic Israel while ignoring or downplaying persecution and atrocities routinely committed by authoritarian regimes.

https://www.inss.org.il/publication/antisemitism-left/

I suppose it’s inevitable, then, that radical leftist students would include Jews with whites in their hit list of oppressors to crusade against, based on even more well-traveled conspiratorial tropes than the new orthodoxy asserting a vast global system of invisible yet omnipresent white supremacism. As the liberal establishment lends its power to increasingly radical groups that include black nationalists, anarchists, and socialists, it’s no wonder antisemitism has been mainstreamed. As Thomas Sowell once put it: “Politically, there are few ideas more potent than the notion that all your problems are caused by other people and their unfairness to you.”

[chilon]

More projection and deflection. No, I do not accept your spurious accusation about the article I posted and discussed at length, which includes a factual description of the issue and a letter from the Dean. Pearl clutching over the article’s title is irrelevant. Per the latter: “This sends a clear signal: Jews are not welcome, unless they deny their support for Israel which, for many, is an integral element of Jewish identity.” If you agree with that, then the article’s title is an accurate description of the implications. If not, then your opinion is not a “fact check” lol.

There’s nothing to “fact check” when the article addresses your excuse about students vs school leadership, and again, your own attempted rebuttal acknowledges widespread condemnation from Jewish advocacy groups. You can’t have your cake and eat it too. Either it’s not a problem or the problem was widely condemned. It’s just the latest in a long-standing trend of leftist antisemitism at US universities.

This says it all. You can't even admit a blatantly false and misleading headline is incorrect.

Berkeley (the University, the law school, or the city) is, in reality, not at all developing "Jewish free zones." That's a completely misleading headline. As most know, if the headline was honest and read "9 out of 100 Student Groups Petition to bar Zionist speakers but the dean and law school rejects their petition" this never would circulated around in right-wing media circles the way it has. It's an obvious strawman invented by the right to pursue their agenda and make up false allegations.

[Lord Thesaurian]

This says it all. You can't even admit a blatantly false and misleading headline is incorrect.

Berkeley (the University, the law school, or the city) is, in reality, not at all developing "Jewish free zones." That's a completely misleading headline. As most know, if the headline was honest and read "9 out of 100 Student Groups Petition to bar Zionist speakers but the dean and law school rejects their petition" this never would circulated around in right-wing media circles the way it has. It's an obvious strawman invented by the right to pursue their agenda and make up false allegations.

This says it all. You’ve yet to refute anything stated in the article while contradicting your own argument to defend the indefensible with doublespeak about how a problem doesn’t exist and it’s right wing propaganda because it was widely condemned as a problem.

[irontaino]

This says it all. You can't even admit a blatantly false and misleading headline is incorrect.

Berkeley (the University, the law school, or the city) is, in reality, not at all developing "Jewish free zones." That's a completely misleading headline. As most know, if the headline was honest and read "9 out of 100 Student Groups Petition to bar Zionist speakers but the dean and law school rejects their petition" this never would circulated around in right-wing media circles the way it has. It's an obvious strawman invented by the right to pursue their agenda and make up false allegations.

Basically right wing Buzzfeed, except instead of misleading headlines for listicles, it's misleading headlines to get rage clicks. Remember, this guy is the same guy who, a few pages ago, got mad that a classically trained flautist played a flute.

[Pontifex Maximus]

So it was all just right-wingers lying to paint liberals as bigots in a pathetic attempt to cover the bigotry that defines conservatism?

Who would have guessed?

Yeah, liberals would never be bigots. As a conservative who has never referred to black children as "little monkeys" and values black lives so much that I have called for the abolition of the institution most responsible for their deaths (abortion) I have a hard time relating. Probably just Russian misinfo though, if I had to guess.

[Lord Thesaurian]

I suppose it’s to be expected in clown world that the political faction obsessed with racism is falling all over itself to deny the prevalence of antisemitism on college campuses. You know it’s bad when the ADL is “right wing propaganda.”

A new survey conducted for Hillel International and ADL (the Anti-Defamation League) found that antisemitism is a looming and present threat for Jewish college students, with one in three students personally experiencing antisemitic hate directed at them in the last academic year. The nationally representative survey also found that most students who experienced antisemitic activity on campus did not report it, suggesting the frequency of incidents on campus is larger than previously thought.
https://www.adl.org/news/press-relea...ge-campuses-in

They even tweeted about Berkeley, citing the same article I did and denouncing antisemitism.

https://twitter.com/ADL/status/1576571171931185152

[Pontifex Maximus]

I love a good purity spiral. Though in actuality this is just a mask-slip. Turns out far leftist ideologies like communism and nazism cannot help but be anti-semitic.

[Lord Thesaurian]

Basically right wing Buzzfeed, except instead of misleading headlines for listicles, it's misleading headlines to get rage clicks. Remember, this guy is the same guy who, a few pages ago, got mad that a classically trained flautist played a flute.

On the contrary, I think Idiocracy is a classic, and couldn’t be more thrilled to see life imitating art.

[chilon]

Basically right wing Buzzfeed, except instead of misleading headlines for listicles, it's misleading headlines to get rage clicks. Remember, this guy is the same guy who, a few pages ago, got mad that a classically trained flautist played a flute.

Yeah, it's absurd but a long-standing part of the right-winger playbook. Post something misleading and blatantly false so the idea can spread and reinforce all sorts of ignorant paranoia among the base that won't check all the facts and just repeat the misleading headline in a game of telephone. I just saw the post you refer and its crazy but I suppose not surprising when you see how that sent so many conservatives into a tizzy for no valid reason. But their comments were very revealing as usual.

[Lord Thesaurian]

Yeah, it's absurd but a long-standing part of the right-winger playbook. Post something misleading and blatantly false so the idea can spread and reinforce all sorts of ignorant paranoia among the base that won't check all the facts and just repeat the misleading headline in a game of telephone. I just saw the post you refer and its crazy but I suppose not surprising when you see how that sent so many conservatives into a tizzy for no valid reason. But their comments were very revealing as usual.

You got a source on the ADL having ever spread “right wing propaganda” for no valid reason, or are you still just making stuff up to defend your political tribe from criticism?

[chilon]

Repeating false and misleading headlines is dangerous.

The facts from the Jewish Dean of the Law School:

An opinion column in the Jewish Journal, which is titled, “Berkeley Develops Jewish-Free Zones,” paints a grossly misleading picture of what happened at Berkeley Law. To state it plainly: There is no “Jewish-Free Zone” at Berkeley Law or on the UC-Berkeley campus. The Law School’s rules are clear that no speaker can be excluded for being Jewish or for holding particular views. I know of no instance where this has been violated.

A handful of student organizations—fewer than 10 out of over 100—initially adopted the by-law. But the rest rejected it or ignored it. Some that quickly accepted it are now reconsidering that. Most importantly, no group has violated the Law School’s policy and excluded a speaker on account of being Jewish or holding particular views about Israel. Such conduct, of course, would be subject to sanctions.

At this stage, all some student groups have done is express their strong disagreement with Israel’s policies. That is their First Amendment right. I find their statement offensive, but they have the right to say it. To punish these student groups, or students, for their speech would clearly violate the Constitution.Ironically, most students and faculty in the Law School were unaware of this controversy or paid little attention to it.

After the first couple of weeks of the semester, it was virtually never mentioned. But some media outlets have brought it worldwide attention. I am convinced it is because they have a narrative they want to tell about higher education generally—and Berkeley, in particular—being antisemitic. They wanted to use this incident to fit their narrative, even though the facts simply don’t support the story they want to tell.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/there-...erkeley-campus

And to emphasize the problem.

Berkeley does not have ‘Jew-Free Zones.’ Saying it does causes real damage

A more considered headline and balanced op-ed might have set the stage for a more constructive debate, but what are the odds Streisand would have retweeted that?

The real debate isn’t over some imaginary “Jew-free zones,” but free speech itself. Pro-Israel advocates like Marcus, who is himself a Berkeley Law graduate, have waged a decades-long campaign to equate anti-Israel opinion and measures with antisemitism. Refusal to engage with pro-Israel Jews is tantamount then, to discrimination.

College campuses have become a battleground for Jews on both sides of this issue, which is why that Jewish Journal headline worked like a cup of vinegar tossed into a baking soda volcano. But the victims of jumping into every campus controversy may be — irony of ironies — Jewish students themselves.

In her 2022 doctoral study of Jewish students at three different universities, Sara Fredman Aeder found that the students’ fear of antisemitism was far greater than their actual experience of it. “Their fear of antisemitism was informed not by their own experiences, but by what they read online and on social media,” Aeder concluded. “Online messaging is causing students to hide even in environments where their identity is accepted and celebrated.” In other words, equating a deeply misguided and roundly condemned resolution against pro-Israel speech with Nazi Germany might win the internet, but at what cost?

https://forward.com/opinion/520623/b...o-real-damage/

[Lord Thesaurian]

Repeating false and misleading headlines is dangerous.

Then why are you repeating false and misleading claims? You’re really going to paint the ADL as “dangerous” for sharing information you don’t like? If your assertions were accurate you’d be able to present something besides deflections and repetition of previously refuted arguments. The article shared by the ADL and myself included and responded to criticism from the Dean:

Berkeley Law Dean Erwin Chemerinsky, a distinguished constitutional law scholar, responds that we should be less concerned about the formal and official exclusion of Zionists from appearing as speakers before nine Berkeley law student organizations. I couldn’t disagree more. And based on the overwhelming support my article has received, including much international attention, it appears others vehemently disagree as well.

Chemerinsky defends Berkeley Law, my alma mater, on the ground that other Berkeley law student groups have not amended their bylaws to exclude Zionist speakers. This in and of itself is a highly concerning argument. Would it be okay for only 5% or 10% of the campus to be segregated? What percentage of the Berkeley campus should be open to all? Shouldn’t it be 100%? And what is the right number of doors that should be closed to students of any race or ethnicity: isn’t it zero?

Chemerinsky misses the point when he insists that all clubs admit Jewish students as members. No one denies this. Nevertheless, an unmistakable signal is sent to those same students when they are told that they would be barred from appearing as invited speakers. This sends a clear signal: Jews are not welcome, unless they deny their support for Israel which, for many, is an integral element of Jewish identity.

In addition, Chemerinsky’s free speech message misses the point. Excluding Zionists is not like excluding Republicans and environmentalists. It is not just viewpoint discrimination. If a Democratic club amended their bylaws to prohibit Republican speakers from appearing before them, we could accept their right to do so. We might regret that they are restricting the possibility of dialogue. We might prefer the approach of those law student groups that seek balanced presentations, in order to advance civil dialogue and promote learning. But we wouldn’t consider this to be a civil rights issue.

When persons are excluded on the basis of their ethnic or ancestral identity, however, we must respond differently. It would not be acceptable for students to adopt bylaws banning Black or Chinese speakers, perhaps with an exception for Black or Chinese students who agree to criticize their communities. This would immediately be recognized as exclusionary conduct, not protected speech. And we would not accept the response that these groups permit Black or Chinese members, as long as these minorities do not wish to appear as speakers. We would recognize it as rank bigotry; and we would reject it.

While I am pleased to see that Dean Chemerinsky has written a letter, it would be better to see him take action. Discrimination should have no place at the University of California, or at any institution of higher learning. Those who care about free speech should protect it fiercely, but that does not mean invoking it where it does not apply. To do so cheapens the value of free speech, as well as providing intolerable barriers to equal opportunity. Those who want to talk about Israel should be free to do so, regardless of their perspective; they should not silence one side of the debate. And they should certainly not use this as an excuse to restrict participation of any ethnic or religious group.

https://jewishjournal.com/commentary...sh-free-zones/

This, coupled with indications Jewish students routinely face antisemitic discrimination on college campuses in the US. What’s dangerous is that you’re more concerned with defending indefensible conduct out of some twisted sense of tribal loyalty than simply acknowledging the facts: Berkeley student groups codified antisemitism.

[chilon]

It's been proven that the original click-bait headline is false and misleading.

That the body of the article might contain the actual facts, that this was just a petition co-signed by 9 out of over 100 student groups that was soundly criticized by the Dean and Law School and will never be actual policy does not excuse the false and misleading headline. And, as the doctoral study linked above shows, publishing and distributing these false and misleading headlines causes actual harm. As far as any alleged antisemitism goes, I'll take the word of Jewish law professors and students at Berkeley Law over anonymous randoms on the internet pushing a clear agenda.

If anyone wants to die on the hill twisting themselves in a knot trying to defend a clearly false and misleading headline, go right ahead.

[Lord Thesaurian]

It's been proven that the original click-bait headline is false and misleading.

You’ve conceded below that the article is factual, so the above is disingenuous at best. In any case, your opinion is not proof of anything.

That the body of the article might contain the actual facts,

So your criticism of it is pointless partisanship, then? Ironic.

I'll take the word of Jewish law professors and students at Berkeley Law over anonymous randoms on the internet pushing a clear agenda.

I’m still waiting for you to evidence this claim that the ADL is “anonymous randoms pushing a right wing agenda” by sharing the same article and voicing the same criticisms I and several other organizations have, per your own initial source.

Since you trust law professors associated with Berkeley so much, you should know the author is not anonymous, but in fact an attorney, law professor and graduate of Berkeley Law, also founder and chairman of the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law and a former Assistant U.S. Secretary of Education for Civil Rights. You were saying?

If anyone wants to die on the hill twisting themselves in a knot trying to defend a clearly false and misleading headline, go right ahead.

More projection. You’ve conceded the article was factual, even while doubling down on your original self-refuting position. That knot is positively Gordian.

[irontaino]

It's been proven that the original click-bait headline is false and misleading.

That the body of the article might contain the actual facts, that this was just a petition co-signed by 9 out of over 100 student groups that was soundly criticized by the Dean and Law School and will never be actual policy does not excuse the false and misleading headline. And, as the doctoral study linked above shows, publishing and distributing these false and misleading headlines causes actual harm. As far as any alleged antisemitism goes, I'll take the word of Jewish law professors and students at Berkeley Law over anonymous randoms on the internet pushing a clear agenda.

If anyone wants to die on the hill twisting themselves in a knot trying to defend a clearly false and misleading headline, go right ahead.

It's not even just the clickbait headline, they're also trying to take nothing and make it something. The real headline should be "9 Student Groups Don't Want to Invite Zionist Speakers, Get Roundly Criticized by School Leadership". That probably wouldn't get as many rage clicks.

[Heathen Hammer]

ADL is mainly famous for multiple cases of them having to pay individuals millions in restitutions for libelous slander, so using them as reference is just as rational as citing KKK as authority figure on crime statistics or citing World Economic Forum on maintenance of high living standards.
Having said that, deliberate exclusion of speakers in academia based on ideology is anti-intellectual as it gets.

[alhoon]

Remember aaaaaall those progressives telling us sane people that the progressive doctors have good checks and balances for when to chop off genitals?

https://www.yahoo.com/news/ve-betray...150000682.html

A gay man was more or less hoodwinked by his progressive therapists to believe he was transexual. And then, he found out he was not. He was just gay but that is not that progressive any more, so the therapists pushed for gender change on the poor guy.

"But rather than examine the homophobia that he had experienced or why he felt that way, his therapists told him that it was because he was trans, he says.
Mr Herron is currently preparing a legal case against the NHS Trust which paid for the operation to remove his genitals which has left him in constant pain."

Remember that, when a progressive tries to convince you that progressives are benign.

Vote for moderates or conservatives in your local elections whether in USA states or Europe. Your genitals and the mental health of your kids is on the line.

[PointOfViewGun]

Remember aaaaaall those progressives telling us sane people that the progressive doctors have good checks and balances for when to chop off genitals?
https://www.yahoo.com/news/ve-betray...150000682.html
A gay man was more or less hoodwinked by his progressive therapists to believe he was transexual. And then, he found out he was not. He was just gay but that is not that progressive any more, so the therapists pushed for gender change on the poor guy.
"But rather than examine the homophobia that he had experienced or why he felt that way, his therapists told him that it was because he was trans, he says.
Mr Herron is currently preparing a legal case against the NHS Trust which paid for the operation to remove his genitals which has left him in constant pain."
Remember that, when a progressive tries to convince you that progressives are benign.
Vote for moderates or conservatives in your local elections whether in USA states or Europe. Your genitals and the mental health of your kids is on the line.

The so called moderates or conservatives would say that he is being punished for not acting the way their god intended him to. However, the clinic Herron received treatment from was problematic all around with extreme backlogs (as in patients waiting two years to get examined) and was scheduled to be shut down by NHS. When a specialized hospital gets a bad record do you try to eliminate the complete practice? Because that happens with a lot of other fields, especially oncology.