Cambridge defended and praised a professor for a wrongdoing

[Esotyrica]

People can be openly racist against whites and get praise for it, yet racism against any other race gets you torn to shreds by the mob.
Yet somehow white privilige still exists.

Ok.

> "praise"?

[citation needed]

didnt she get promoted

[Porotia]

> "praise"?

[citation needed]

didnt she get promoted

Yea, she was in fact promoted.

Astoria's requested citations:
Source 1, Source 2, Source 3, Source 4, and Source 5.

[Gravlen]

didnt she get promoted

Yea, she was in fact promoted. The police in Cambridge are now investigating the whole thing, for obvious reasons.

Astoria's requested citations:
Source 1, Source 2, Source 3, Source 4, and Source 5.

You're two weeks late to the party.

A spokesperson for Cambridgeshire Police told Varsity that “after receiving multiple complaints” in relation to the content of “a Twitter post that has been shared a large number of times in recent days,” officers had “concluded no offence has been committed.”

[Porotia]

Yea, she was in fact promoted. The police in Cambridge are now investigating the whole thing, for obvious reasons.

Astoria's requested citations:
Source 1, Source 2, Source 3, Source 4, and Source 5.

You're two weeks late to the party.

A spokesperson for Cambridgeshire Police told Varsity that “after receiving multiple complaints” in relation to the content of “a Twitter post that has been shared a large number of times in recent days,” officers had “concluded no offence has been committed.”

I'm the OP of this thread. You're the one who's late.

[-Astoria-]

didnt she get promoted

Yea, she was in fact promoted.

Astoria's requested citations:
Source 1, Source 2, Source 3, Source 4, and Source 5.

You missed a bit:

Dr Priyamvada Gopal, 51, who teaches in the Faculty of English at Churchill College, took to the social media platform on Tuesday evening to write: 'I'll say it again. White Lives Don't Matter. As white lives.'

Dr Gopal later explained on social media that she was 'clearly speaking to a structure and ideology, not about people'

Also, seriously? Using the Daily Mail & the Sun (ffs) as sources?

bvggfSeparately, Gopal announced on Twitter that she will be instructing lawyers to take legal action against the Daily Mail after they published a column in their print edition on Saturday which Gopal claims is defamatory.

The column by Amanda Platell stated that Gopal wrote about replacing white people. However this “fake quote” had not been made by Gopal and Cambridge Police confirmed “after investigation that screenshots” of the tweet “purportedly from Professor Gopal are hoaxes”.

Also, as per the promotion, that had nothing to do with the tweets:

It was also announced, on Thursday, that Gopal is to be promoted to full Professorial Chair. The English Faculty Board stressed that this promotion was “decided over the course of the last six months by the University’s normal promotions procedure”.

And also, to be fair-ish:

Cambridge University Conservative Association (CUCA) criticised Gopal on Saturday for liking a tweet that included a sentence calling “whites” a “disease that needs to be cleansed from the earth”.

Gopal has since described this as “a poor choice of ‘like’”, writing that she “withdraw the ‘like’ unconditionally” and claiming she was “‘liking’ a series of supportive tweets late at night, not reading them properly or all the way through”.

The Professor also called on her followers to report the account that made the tweet, saying it “looks like a set-up” and that “the struggle is against white supremacy, not white people.”

As for the Examiner article, it mostly pulled the info from summit.news, run by this guy - so that's already a red flag.

and the backlash prompted the university to issue a statement that said that professors have the right to express their opinions, according to Summit News.

Also, more context (whether it stands up or not):

"When I talk about abolishing whiteness, I talk about political practices and ideologies. Systems of oppression, whether white or brown, should be abolished," Gopal later clarified. "It's about abolishing a race hierarchy where whites are at the top."

These quotes were literally taken from the sources you put.

[Gravlen]

You're two weeks late to the party.

A spokesperson for Cambridgeshire Police told Varsity that “after receiving multiple complaints” in relation to the content of “a Twitter post that has been shared a large number of times in recent days,” officers had “concluded no offence has been committed.”

I'm the OP of this thread. You're the one who's late.

You're doing a piss poor job of it then, considering that the police looked into things and concluded before you made this thread. Yet here you are, weeks later, thinking that the police are now investigating it.

Guess you haven't read your own damned thread.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

I'm the OP of this thread.

Next time phrase your OP better.

You're clearly outraged by Prof. Gopal's tweet, so I guess you want something done about it.
But the only question you put was whether it was illegal.

And that gives anyone who disagrees with you a firm anchor. Any time a debate isn't going how they would like, they can "return to the subject" which is whether the professor's highly questionable tweet is ILLEGAL.

Now all you've mustered to your side are some people saying it should be illegal (though it's not) because nazi pug.

Bit of a mistake you made there.

[Porotia]

Dr Priyamvada Gopal, 51, who teaches in the Faculty of English at Churchill College, took to the social media platform on Tuesday evening to write: 'I'll say it again. White Lives Don't Matter. As white lives.'

It's the responsibility of the poster to ensure that their post isn't taken the wrong way, and any consequence that occurs is solely their fault.Nobody told her to post the tweet. It was her decision.

Also, seriously? Using the Daily Mail & the Sun (ffs) as sources?

Those sources were the only ones I could find. I don't really trust or use them either, as they're all idiots.

Separately, Gopal announced on Twitter that she will be instructing lawyers to take legal action against the Daily Mail after they published a column in their print edition on Saturday which Gopal claims is defamatory.

The column by Amanda Platell stated that Gopal wrote about replacing white people. However this “fake quote” had not been made by Gopal and Cambridge Police confirmed “after investigation that screenshots” of the tweet “purportedly from Professor Gopal are hoaxes”.

Also, as per the promotion, that had nothing to do with the tweets:

It was also announced, on Thursday, that Gopal is to be promoted to full Professorial Chair. The English Faculty Board stressed that this promotion was “decided over the course of the last six months by the University’s normal promotions procedure”.

And also, to be fair-ish:

Cambridge University Conservative Association (CUCA) criticised Gopal on Saturday for liking a tweet that included a sentence calling “whites” a “disease that needs to be cleansed from the earth”.

Gopal has since described this as “a poor choice of ‘like’”, writing that she “withdraw the ‘like’ unconditionally” and claiming she was “‘liking’ a series of supportive tweets late at night, not reading them properly or all the way through”.

You never know if someone is lying. We can't read the minds of other people, so who knows if she wasn't being honest.

You're clearly outraged by Prof. Gopal's tweet, so I guess you want something done about it.
But the only question you put was whether it was illegal.

And that gives anyone who disagrees with you a firm anchor. Any time a debate isn't going how they would like, they can "return to the subject" which is whether the professor's highly questionable tweet is ILLEGAL.

Now all you've mustered to your side are some people saying it should be illegal (though it's not) because nazi pug.
Bit of a mistake you made there.

My main focus is not nazi pug, and I'm not even the user who mentioned it first. Also, her post falls under the UK's Communications Act 2003, which by all means makes her post illegal, as she lives within the UK.

[Gravlen]

You're clearly outraged by Prof. Gopal's tweet, so I guess you want something done about it.
But the only question you put was whether it was illegal.

And that gives anyone who disagrees with you a firm anchor. Any time a debate isn't going how they would like, they can "return to the subject" which is whether the professor's highly questionable tweet is ILLEGAL.

Now all you've mustered to your side are some people saying it should be illegal (though it's not) because nazi pug.
Bit of a mistake you made there.

My main focus is not nazi pug, and I'm not even the user who mentioned it first. Also, her post falls under the UK's Communications Act 2003, which by all means makes her post illegal, as she lives within the UK.

And as I have repeatedly pointed out, that is not true. I have explained why the Communications Act 2003 doesn't make her speech illegal, and I have shown that UK law enforcement have looked into the matter - prior to the creation of this thread - and similarly have concluded that no offence has been committed.

[West Leas Oros 2]

Professor says stupid bullshit, University too yellow-bellied to call out bullshit. News at 11. Honestly, who cares? All it proves is that Cambridge tolerates it, and the rest of us move on with our lives. Best not to feed the trolls or the flamers, and this professor seems to fit the bill.

[Hrythingland]

I disagree. There's no point in apologising to someone not willing to accept it.

The purpose of apologizing is to acknowledge that a wrongdoing was done to someone and asking for their forgiveness. If there's no apology, there's either no acknowledgement of wrongdoing or acknowledgement that you've done something that needs to be forgiven.

And there's certainly little point in apologising for history in general.

Sure, 'history in general' is not something to apologize for. However, history that is done by an entity -in this case, a state such as the United Kingdom- that still exists means that the wrongdoer is still alive.

I'm happy to put my hands up and say that my predecessors got in wrong in places like Ireland and India but I'm not going to apologise for having an empire or my ancestors doing what they could to further the renown of their people.

Why is having an empire or doing what someone can to further the renown of their people automatically not something that needs an apology?

Almost every 'people' worth mentioning in history owe other peoples an apology yet we're only really demanding it from Europeans. A few more consistent actors shake their fist at the Japanese and Turks but that's about it. No one rails at Mongolia or Arabs and whatnot. People see this for what it is which is an anti-white invective. That we should take a knee, move aside, apologise, make amends, dismantle our own societies.

Whataboutism is an illogical argument. You should probably avoid making illogical arguments.

No. I apologise for nothing. Partly because we did what we needed to do in the global game of dog eat dog and partly because in my personal case most of my ancestors were either crawling through a Welsh coal mine or farming kelp in a Highland croft. A few served as cavalry in places like Crimea, India and Africa but they were just rank and file not officers. I feel no shame and only a little bit of pity.

Direct benefits or indirect benefits, there are benefits nonetheless.

There is a time and place for apologies but asking the descendants of people who for the most part were just furthering their national interest in ways largely acceptable at the time. And as I said, there are a lot more apologies to be metered out by other people if we demand that the European Empires and their descendant nations apologise. I have some degree of pity for people who upon our discovery of them could barely rise to the challenge of lighting fires like the Andamans or all the hunter-gatherer tribes... but I have no remorse whatsoever, as I expect they would have had no remorse for me. And as previous invaders of Europe and Britain had no remorse for the settlers there. It is the ebb and flow of history, I think demanding we apologise for things like that is just bizarre frankly. Note that most of this just comes from ethnic minorities who live comfortable lives in Western states or occasionally from the Third World literati who have used institutions that we set up to whinge about this. Anecdotal, but on my travels around the world most of the poorer folk in those parts of the world either know very little about that sort of thing or just shrug and say 'that's just what happens' or variations to that effect.