Cambridge defended and praised a professor for a wrongdoing

[Vetalia]

She's free to go back to India if living in the UK around white European people bothers her so much but I doubt she'll be doing so any time soon.

[Major-Tom]

Had she worded it differently, you could make a case that she was caught in an instance of being misunderstood, but this seems pretty cut & dry. That said, plenty of Unis retain well-known old-school racists, makes sense they would retain people like this as well. Not that they should for either groupings.

[New Bremerton]

I think the lesson one can learn from this is that it is fine to vilify, insult and make racist remarks against white people, but that anything similar directed a minority (even though, for example, Islam is the second biggest religion in the world and is not a race) will not be tolerated. It makes me both furious and relieved to see these double standards in action. Furious because its disgusting, but relieved because it means that I'm not simply a paranoid alt-right troll or whatever buzzword is in vogue.

Isn't it scary?

Took the words right out of my mouth. I've been smeared and called all sorts of names just for saying what you wrote. I live in a Muslim country and it's illegal to utter even one word in protest against Islam and the bigots who commit egregious human rights abuses in its name, but EVERYONE ELSE is fair game in this topsy-turvy PC world.

This disgusting, racist POS was purposely and unambiguously inciting racial hatred against white people and she has the fucking gall to double down and gloat about not being fucking canceled while she demands that police investigate her CRITICS for, well, CRITICIZING HER? WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK. This sounds EXACTLY like the kind of legalistic intimidation that happens EVERY DAY in my country to non-Muslim, anti-government critics.

If this ungrateful bitch doesn't enjoy living in a predominantly white, progressive, liberal, Western country that treats "oppressed" brown people like her with the utmost dignity and respect, then she is free to fuck off right back to India. Given her background, she can obviously afford the expenses, unlike the poor, white beggars whose miserable lives don't matter one iota to her bigoted self.

White people, Israeli Jews, and Malaysian Chinese like myself are all in the same boat when it comes to "anti-racist" political correctness being weaponized against our very collective right to exist by the very same people who gaslight and scream about how THEIR preferred races and faiths are being denied a right to exist and how THEIR lives matter, but the lives of whites, Jews, and Malaysian Chinese evidently don't, thereby leading directly to racially discriminatory affirmative action policies and the passage of "hate speech" laws that are selectively and inconsistently enforced in direct violation of the rule of law, which demands that ALL are treated equally before the law without fear or favor. I repeat once again that Black Lives Matter is really just a thinly-veiled, racist dogwhistle for "black lives matter MORE and white lives DON'T", as this vile, unapologetically racist bitch amply demonstrates. To which I reply once again, ALL LIVES MATTER.

I think these woke PC university "professors" that have been knowingly indoctrinating young people with hateful, racist, sexist propaganda should be prosecuted under the very same, authoritarian, Malaysian-style hate speech laws that they themselves helped promulgate to shield Islam from legitimate criticism and tiptoe around the delicate feelings of "oppressed" Muslims just to give them a taste of their own, one-sided, hypocritical, cancel culture medicine. We should arrest all those who insult Jews, men and white people and deny or downplay the Holocaust, charge them, convict them, and sentence them to the highest penalty under the law (followed by deportation if applicable, which would most likely apply to Islamist hate preachers), and THEN we abolish these ridiculous, anti-free speech laws while these people continue to serve out the remainder of their sentences with a life-long criminal record to book.

These woke, cultural Marxists should be made to learn VERY quickly just how it feels to be censored and canceled. If they want to play this disgusting game, then I would be more than happy to oblige. Maybe they'll think twice before trampling on the rights and dignity of their fellow human beings while hypocritically pretending to champion human rights, again in typical, woke, CCP-style, gaslighting fashion.

Criticizing Islam is illegal here in Malaysia where radical, far-right Islamists literally govern the country and non-Muslims are officially second-class citizens. Criticizing Islam is ALSO illegal in the UK and EU under the guise of "hate speech". Guess whose side these woke, pro-EU leftists are on (radical Islamists and BLM racists) and guess which people they're throwing under the bus (Jews, white people, and non-Muslim minorities in the Muslim world).

[Kragholm Free States]

Professor of literal bitching-about-white-people studies caught bitching about white people. How could anyone have seen this coming?

One can only live in hope that these sorts of people will cause their own movements to haemorrhage popular support until there's nothing left of them but a room full of grievance studies "academics" sitting in a circle passing buzzword-laden papers back and forth and screaming hate to nobody in particular. Probably best to soundproof the room, come to think of it.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

Professor of literal bitching-about-white-people studies caught bitching about white people. How could anyone have seen this coming?

One can only live in hope that these sorts of people will cause their own movements to haemorrhage popular support until there's nothing left of them but a room full of grievance studies "academics" sitting in a circle passing buzzword-laden papers back and forth and screaming hate to nobody in particular. Probably best to soundproof the room, come to think of it.

Professors exert the most influence -- not by tweeting -- but by influencing the students and lesser teaching staff. The students come and go: two years or three years from now there will still be high quality freshmen bound for prestigious careers taking her courses at Cambridge, and not really caring much that she's the one who tweeted something offensive about white people. If they even know.

[Porotia]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_spee ... ed_Kingdom

(a) uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour, or
(b) displays any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening, abusive or insulting,
thereby causing that or another person harassment, alarm or distress.


It also counts if the statement is "Likely to stir up racial hatred", regardless of intent.

You'll note that "offensive" is not the correct criteria, as I said.

Hate to break it to you, but saying "White Lives Don't Matter" is offensive to people, just like how people get offended if someone said the same for Black lives or Hispanic lives.

It also counts if the statement is "Likely to stir up racial hatred", regardless of intent.

This is also a good reason why that professor's tweet is illegal. It singles out white people for malicious purposes.

Quite a number of people hailing from religions that he's attacked would disagree.

It's the UK though. Perhaps religion isn't a "protected class".

I'd partially consider religion to be a protected class in the UK. There's a large number of religions that seem to be protected from laws in Britain, seeing how their government and the press always seem to side with immigrants a lot more than people who have lived there for generations.

Professors exert the most influence -- not by tweeting -- but by influencing the students and lesser teaching staff. The students come and go: two years or three years from now there will still be high quality freshmen bound for prestigious careers taking her courses at Cambridge, and not really caring much that she's the one who tweeted something offensive about white people. If they even know.

And as Nobel just said, the opinions of students change a lot as they learn. Their professors have the ability to spread their viewpoints to the students that they teach.

[Porotia]

I have to make another reply due to the size of this one.

I think the lesson one can learn from this is that it is fine to vilify, insult and make racist remarks against white people, but that anything similar directed a minority (even though, for example, Islam is the second biggest religion in the world and is not a race) will not be tolerated. It makes me both furious and relieved to see these double standards in action. Furious because its disgusting, but relieved because it means that I'm not simply a paranoid alt-right troll or whatever buzzword is in vogue.

Isn't it scary?

Took the words right out of my mouth. I've been smeared and called all sorts of names just for saying what you wrote. I live in a Muslim country and it's illegal to utter even one word in protest against Islam and the bigots who commit egregious human rights abuses in its name, but EVERYONE ELSE is fair game in this topsy-turvy PC world.

This disgusting, racist POS was purposely and unambiguously inciting racial hatred against white people and she has the fucking gall to double down and gloat about not being fucking canceled while she demands that police investigate her CRITICS for, well, CRITICIZING HER? WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK. This sounds EXACTLY like the kind of legalistic intimidation that happens EVERY DAY in my country to non-Muslim, anti-government critics.

If this ungrateful bitch doesn't enjoy living in a predominantly white, progressive, liberal, Western country that treats "oppressed" brown people like her with the utmost dignity and respect, then she is free to fuck off right back to India. Given her background, she can obviously afford the expenses, unlike the poor, white beggars whose miserable lives don't matter one iota to her bigoted self.

White people, Israeli Jews, and Malaysian Chinese like myself are all in the same boat when it comes to "anti-racist" political correctness being weaponized against our very collective right to exist by the very same people who gaslight and scream about how THEIR preferred races and faiths are being denied a right to exist and how THEIR lives matter, but the lives of whites, Jews, and Malaysian Chinese evidently don't, thereby leading directly to racially discriminatory affirmative action policies and the passage of "hate speech" laws that are selectively and inconsistently enforced in direct violation of the rule of law, which demands that ALL are treated equally before the law without fear or favor. I repeat once again that Black Lives Matter is really just a thinly-veiled, racist dogwhistle for "black lives matter MORE and white lives DON'T", as this vile, unapologetically racist bitch amply demonstrates. To which I reply once again, ALL LIVES MATTER.

I think these woke PC university "professors" that have been knowingly indoctrinating young people with hateful, racist, sexist propaganda should be prosecuted under the very same, authoritarian, Malaysian-style hate speech laws that they themselves helped promulgate to shield Islam from legitimate criticism and tiptoe around the delicate feelings of "oppressed" Muslims just to give them a taste of their own, one-sided, hypocritical, cancel culture medicine. We should arrest all those who insult Jews, men and white people and deny or downplay the Holocaust, charge them, convict them, and sentence them to the highest penalty under the law (followed by deportation if applicable, which would most likely apply to Islamist hate preachers), and THEN we abolish these ridiculous, anti-free speech laws while these people continue to serve out the remainder of their sentences with a life-long criminal record to book.

These woke, cultural Marxists should be made to learn VERY quickly just how it feels to be censored and canceled. If they want to play this disgusting game, then I would be more than happy to oblige. Maybe they'll think twice before trampling on the rights and dignity of their fellow human beings while hypocritically pretending to champion human rights, again in typical, woke, CCP-style, gaslighting fashion.

Criticizing Islam is illegal here in Malaysia where radical, far-right Islamists literally govern the country and non-Muslims are officially second-class citizens. Criticizing Islam is ALSO illegal in the UK and EU under the guise of "hate speech". Guess whose side these woke, pro-EU leftists are on (radical Islamists and BLM racists) and guess which people they're throwing under the bus (Jews, white people, and non-Muslim minorities in the Muslim world).

Even American Jews like me are called racists. I've actually been called a neo-nazi before, surprisingly many times. People judge those who don't have the same views and opinions as them too quickly these days.

[Gravlen]

You'll note that "offensive" is not the correct criteria, as I said.

Hate to break it to you, but saying "White Lives Don't Matter" is offensive to people, just like how people get offended if someone said the same for Black lives or Hispanic lives.

Break away, but you should reread my post because your response to it is completely missing the point.

It also counts if the statement is "Likely to stir up racial hatred", regardless of intent.

This is also a good reason why that professor's tweet is illegal. It singles out white people for malicious purposes.

The tweet isn't illegal. Singling out white people in a statement is not against any law.

[West Leas Oros 2]

Gee, some silly University is coming to the defense of an idiot professor who likes to spout bullshit? That’s new. /s

[Bear Stearns]

Suddenly the cancel culture people are calling for nuance, context, and freedom of speech.

[Bear Stearns]

Professor of literal bitching-about-white-people studies caught bitching about white people. How could anyone have seen this coming?

One can only live in hope that these sorts of people will cause their own movements to haemorrhage popular support until there's nothing left of them but a room full of grievance studies "academics" sitting in a circle passing buzzword-laden papers back and forth and screaming hate to nobody in particular. Probably best to soundproof the room, come to think of it.

Professors exert the most influence -- not by tweeting -- but by influencing the students and lesser teaching staff. The students come and go: two years or three years from now there will still be high quality freshmen bound for prestigious careers taking her courses at Cambridge, and not really caring much that she's the one who tweeted something offensive about white people. If they even know.

You don't think these attitudes are reflected in her courses?

[Bear Stearns]

If it was said against a minority, the professor would have been fired and arrested. Let's not kid ourselves. This is what happens when the Frankfurt school takes over your civilization.

I mean, no, they wouldn't, but yes, if the circumstances of a situation are completely different, the outcome will likely be different as well.
Not exactly sure what point you think you're making here.
Well, I do, but it doesn't hold up at all.

Please explain why the circumstances are different. This ought to be good.

[Crockerland]

I don't know about the Washington Examiner as a source, although the Guardian is echoing how the professor claims this was against the concept of race instead of the lives of people regarded as 'white'.

I'll just say here that I know how the Guardian is biased towards what we regard as 'liberal', or perhaps the somewhat different 'left' viewpoints.

If that's what she was aiming at, I can understand what she means, but she worded it in a really terrible way that has left me suspicious about the intent behind her post.

For some reason, I get the feeling that if somebody said "Black Lives don't matter," this excuse would not hold up.

[Cekoviu]

having examined some less biased sources (i.e. not PJW/washington "examiner"), i can see the point she was trying to make, but it was INCREDIBLY poorly worded. as someone planning on going into academia, this sort of conduct is terribly worrying to me because as a professor, your goal should be to cultivate a safe and respectful environment for your students by communicating clearly and acting fairly. she is clearly either unable to communicate properly -- which leads one to doubt her prowess as a professor -- or cannot act fairly towards all students, which is deeply concerning for obvious reasons. it's not entirely clear whether cambridge has taken any internal disciplinary actions that simply haven't been publicized, but if they haven't, they should.

[Cekoviu]

I mean, no, they wouldn't, but yes, if the circumstances of a situation are completely different, the outcome will likely be different as well.
Not exactly sure what point you think you're making here.
Well, I do, but it doesn't hold up at all.

Please explain why the circumstances are different. This ought to be good.

those who hold a minority of institutional power are more damaged by prejudice than those who hold a majority of institutional power. therefore, prejudice against minorities is overall more damaging than prejudice against majorities and they are not equivalent.

[Aclion]

I know nothing about British speech law.

Could the OP cite some statue which was violated?

That would be section 18 of part 3 of the England and Wales and Scotland the Public Order Act of 1986

[West Leas Oros 2]

Please explain why the circumstances are different. This ought to be good.

those who hold a minority of institutional power are more damaged by prejudice than those who hold a majority of institutional power. therefore, prejudice against minorities is overall more damaging than prejudice against majorities and they are not equivalent.

Ah, the "prejudice plus power" defense. How original. :^)

[Cekoviu]

those who hold a minority of institutional power are more damaged by prejudice than those who hold a majority of institutional power. therefore, prejudice against minorities is overall more damaging than prejudice against majorities and they are not equivalent.

Ah, the "prejudice plus power" defense. How original. :^)

i don't think you're saying what you think you're saying

[West Leas Oros 2]

Ah, the "prejudice plus power" defense. How original. :^)

i don't think you're saying what you think you're saying

That doesn't even make any sense. If not that, what argument are you trying to make?

[Cekoviu]

i don't think you're saying what you think you're saying

That doesn't even make any sense. If not that, what argument are you trying to make?

that those who hold a minority of institutional power are more damaged by prejudice than those who hold a majority of institutional power and therefore, prejudice against minorities is overall more damaging than prejudice against majorities. due to the difference in damage inflicted by those different types of prejudice, they are not equivalent.

i know it's tempting to think i'm defining racism as "prejudice + power" because i've written the words prejudice and power within the same paragraph, but please try to contain yourself long enough to start thinking.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

That doesn't even make any sense. If not that, what argument are you trying to make?

that those who hold a minority of institutional power are more damaged by prejudice than those who hold a majority of institutional power and therefore, prejudice against minorities is overall more damaging than prejudice against majorities. due to the difference in damage inflicted by those different types of prejudice, they are not equivalent.

Well I'd agree, except that logically the smaller a minority the more protection it would deserve. The smallest minority possible is ONE person ... and now we can't criticize anyone individually, at all?

[West Leas Oros 2]

That doesn't even make any sense. If not that, what argument are you trying to make?

that those who hold a minority of institutional power are more damaged by prejudice than those who hold a majority of institutional power and therefore, prejudice against minorities is overall more damaging than prejudice against majorities. due to the difference in damage inflicted by those different types of prejudice, they are not equivalent.

i know it's tempting to think i'm defining racism as "prejudice + power" because i've written the words prejudice and power within the same paragraph, but please try to contain yourself long enough to start thinking.

Uh-huh. Sure. But no amount of acrobatics can change that framing things in terms of drawn-in-the sand identity is ridiculous. And, are the bourgeoisie not a minority? Albeit not the same sort, but a minority nonetheless. That's the problem with this line of thinking. It is twistable, malleable, and generally ends up as a poor excuse in defense of shitty behavior. Regardless, the constant reduction to "minority vs. majority" and other simplistic "versuses" ignores the intricacies of institutions and institutional power, which is not, as the liberals believe, cut along lines of identity. Keep this in mind before jumping to the defense of an asshat.

[Cekoviu]

that those who hold a minority of institutional power are more damaged by prejudice than those who hold a majority of institutional power and therefore, prejudice against minorities is overall more damaging than prejudice against majorities. due to the difference in damage inflicted by those different types of prejudice, they are not equivalent.

i know it's tempting to think i'm defining racism as "prejudice + power" because i've written the words prejudice and power within the same paragraph, but please try to contain yourself long enough to start thinking.

Uh-huh. Sure. But no amount of acrobatics can change that framing things in terms of drawn-in-the sand identity is ridiculous. And, are the bourgeoisie not a minority? Albeit not the same sort, but a minority nonetheless. That's the problem with this line of thinking. It is twistable, malleable, and generally ends up as a poor excuse in defense of shitty behavior. Regardless, the constant reduction to "minority vs. majority" and other simplistic "versuses" ignores the intricacies of institutions and institutional power, which is not, as the liberals believe, cut along lines of identity. Keep this in mind before jumping to the defense of an asshat.

if you take a look at what i wrote (1st sentence) — and i know this is pretty well-hidden and subtle, so i don't blame you for missing it — you'll notice that i actually wrote "those who hold a minority of institutional power" (and "majority of institutional power" a few words afterward) to indicate that i'm not necessarily talking about STATISTICAL minorities like the bourgeoisie, and i was actually explicitly indicating that the intricacies of institutional power must be factored in

you may also notice that i've actually indicated that i have a pretty big problem with her behavior in the post made immediately before the one that you're trying to 'gotcha' (relevant part bolded, again, pretty short and subtle, so missing it is reasonable):

having examined some less biased sources (i.e. not PJW/washington "examiner"), i can see the point she was trying to make, but it was INCREDIBLY poorly worded. as someone planning on going into academia, this sort of conduct is terribly worrying to me because as a professor, your goal should be to cultivate a safe and respectful environment for your students by communicating clearly and acting fairly. she is clearly either unable to communicate properly -- which leads one to doubt her prowess as a professor -- or cannot act fairly towards all students, which is deeply concerning for obvious reasons. it's not entirely clear whether cambridge has taken any internal disciplinary actions that simply haven't been publicized, but if they haven't, they should.

so i'm not really sure why u think i'm "jumping to the defense of an asshat." i'm merely inserting some nuance into what has so far been a terribly simplistic and reductionist argument (par for the course for NSG tbf)

[Brinckerhoff]

Her opinion may be shite but its hers and shes not outright advocating genocide

It sounds to me -- Her tweets, unabridged, say, "White lives don't matter. As white lives. Abolish whiteness. -- she's working at a metalinguistic point, which would make sense, given her field of study. What I hope she means is something proposed rather more entertainingly in Warren Beatty's Bulworth: racial deconstruction. The present obsession with race in the USA is driven by petty-bourgeois angst, wanting to have something moral to work on which doesn't involve raising their own taxes -- they think they're the middle class, which is why "rich" starts at 250 or 500k in the tax code, not 100k/individual. Sooooo much cheaper to cut money to keeping little old ladies in the ghetto safe at night than it is to, say, demand a 100% luxury tax on private education to be invested in Free, Appropriate, Mandatory Public Education. Funny how they've found a way to use "justice" as a way to keep their taxes low so they can keep their feet on the rest of our heads.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmNFDJgPrRI

[West Leas Oros 2]

Uh-huh. Sure. But no amount of acrobatics can change that framing things in terms of drawn-in-the sand identity is ridiculous. And, are the bourgeoisie not a minority? Albeit not the same sort, but a minority nonetheless. That's the problem with this line of thinking. It is twistable, malleable, and generally ends up as a poor excuse in defense of shitty behavior. Regardless, the constant reduction to "minority vs. majority" and other simplistic "versuses" ignores the intricacies of institutions and institutional power, which is not, as the liberals believe, cut along lines of identity. Keep this in mind before jumping to the defense of an asshat.

if you take a look at what i wrote (1st sentence) — and i know this is pretty well-hidden and subtle, so i don't blame you for missing it — you'll notice that i actually wrote "those who hold a minority of institutional power" (and "majority of institutional power" a few words afterward) to indicate that i'm not necessarily talking about STATISTICAL minorities like the bourgeoisie, and i was actually explicitly indicating that the intricacies of institutional power must be factored in

you may also notice that i've actually indicated that i have a pretty big problem with her behavior in the post made immediately before the one that you're trying to 'gotcha' (relevant part bolded, again, pretty short and subtle, so missing it is reasonable):

having examined some less biased sources (i.e. not PJW/washington "examiner"), i can see the point she was trying to make, but it was INCREDIBLY poorly worded. as someone planning on going into academia, this sort of conduct is terribly worrying to me because as a professor, your goal should be to cultivate a safe and respectful environment for your students by communicating clearly and acting fairly. she is clearly either unable to communicate properly -- which leads one to doubt her prowess as a professor -- or cannot act fairly towards all students, which is deeply concerning for obvious reasons. it's not entirely clear whether cambridge has taken any internal disciplinary actions that simply haven't been publicized, but if they haven't, they should.

so i'm not really sure why u think i'm "jumping to the defense of an asshat." i'm merely inserting some nuance into what has so far been a terribly simplistic and reductionist argument (par for the course for NSG tbf)

Call me a nitpicker, but if your opposition to this is "it's bad conduct that might be detrimental to students" and not "Wow, saying this kind of shit is a pretty fucking dickheaded thing to do", I might question if you really oppose such behavior or beliefs. And again, if you are talking about those who hold a minority of institutional power, then why is that argument so commonly used exclusively along lines of identity? (Not saying you are, but if we really want to talk about institutional power, wouldn't a professor at a university be at the top of its power structure, essentially making them the holder of "institutional power" rather than students of various identities?)