Clemson professor looking to get fired...

[clemson_dude04]

I'm seeing more chatter where this could be the guy. Nothing confirmed. Just seeing this trending more as the day has gone on.

 

[ChicagoTiger85]

Uh, Clemson is a public entity so this is a government thing. Whether a government entity can regulate such speech depends on several factors (was the employee speaking as a citizen on a matter of public concern rather than in the performance of his or her duties?). If that answer is yes, then there is a balancing test that is applied and I won’t get into the specifics of that. It’s called the Pickering test.

It’s also not just “a government thing.” The “government thing” is that the government can be prevented from proscribing your speech. But it’s also an aspect of cultural constitutionalism. Private entities aren’t prevented from regulating speech in their purview, but a private entity that heavily regulates speech is an illiberal one. Not all private entities need to be liberal about speech, and there are appropriate and inappropriate times and venues for various speech. However, for instance, a private university that only allows one viewpoint to be expressed will provide a pretty impoverished education that’s out of step with our citizenship.

 

[Cabotiger]

It's wild. He makes these statements aas if we all don't have a very public record of comments from all of these jokers.

Some of these people just enjoy their time on Earth 2 for whatever reason.

You truly are an imbecile, stick to what you do. Meaningless little videos that no one cares about!!!!

 

[_Puck_]

It seems like both of you are very confusedly, and mistakenly, agreeing with each other.

When people criticized cancel culture, what they meant was the attempt to prevent anybody who disagreed with a certain regnant point of view from having any public platform. This was justified based on the idea that certain people hearing differing viewpoints would feel so bad about it that it would create an unsafe environment. Thus, you couldn’t allow somebody who disagreed with “trans” ideology speak in public or post anything on many social media sites, let alone publish something in a mainstream media outlet. And if somebody were to argue that police weren’t indiscriminately killing black people, then it was OK to prevent them from having any public platform not only by trying to prevent them from getting speaking opportunities, but also by shouting them down and rioting to prevent them from being heard. The issue is/was the idea that it was dangerous to allow different viewpoints from being heard, so it was actually virtuous to deplatform everyone you disagreed with.

Further, the problem is/was less that there would ever be any censorship, or that all speech was always appropriate, than that even in venues and media explicitly committed to open debate and deliberation, or in situations that had nothing to do with promoting a certain kind of politics (workplaces, sports, etc), people were being canceled for having the wrong (ie. not progressive) views.

There is/was also an aspect to cancel culture where people were going fishing for potentially objectionable things in someone’s past, and then using them to try to hurt that person. It was way too frequent that somebody would find something somebody said on social media in high school, years ago, when nobody seemed to have been hurt or to have cared, and then use that against somebody. Even though this was more recent, it looks a little more like that.

But I do think you have to make a distinction between being indecent and being ‘wrong.’ People shouldn’t be cancelled for being ‘wrong,’ in nearly all cases. But I don’t think most people have a problem with not giving a platform to an indecent person.

All that said, I do think many of the people who rightly complained about cancel culture a few years ago don’t seem to mind using the same kind of power used against them and people they agreed with. That just probably goes to show that being liberal minded- which is what belief in free speech means- is actually pretty rare.

It’s also probably wise to let your first response to somebody being assassinated be sympathy and grief, rather than trying to score political points. I don’t know why a guy like this professor felt like he had to say this immediately.

I'm not particularly making any point other than to laugh at the OPs concern trolling. I agree with pretty much everything you're saying, though I've lost any sort of compassion for the people celebrating this. I saw that comic posted quite a lot from the left as conservatives got fired from their jobs over the past decade. Turnabout is fair play.

 

[ChicagoTiger85]

I'm not particularly making any point other than to laugh at the OPs concern trolling. I agree with pretty much everything you're saying, though I've lost any sort of compassion for the people celebrating this. I saw that comic posted quite a lot from the left as conservatives got fired from their jobs over the past decade. Turnabout is fair play.

I hear you, I just don’t think turnabout is fair play. Would be nice if people didn’t change their standards based on who’s doing it (and I know that’s not really what you’re doing).

I definitely hope people don’t feel like turnabout is fair play with these assassinations.

 

[castlesl]

Uh, Clemson is a public entity so this is a government thing. Whether a government entity can regulate such speech depends on several factors (was the employee speaking as a citizen on a matter of public concern rather than in the performance of his or her duties?). If that answer is yes, then there is a balancing test that is applied and I won’t get into the specifics of that. It’s called the Pickering test.

Say what ever you want, the dude can be fired. Greenville county fired a teacher.

 

[_Puck_]

I hear you, I just don’t think turnabout is fair play.

I understand, I was there too, not long ago.

 

[tigergray]

Anyone know this *******?

Clemson needs to fire his fat *** on the spot

 

[Willence]

Whataboutism is why things never change. There should be standards and they aren't based on party. Instead of using the wrong actions of others yesterday to justify terrible things today, there should just be standards where something is totally condemned and then we move on rejecting this in any capacity that it appears. But it's all some folks have because they just aren't that bright and clearly lack decency.

The dehumanization and constant false statements making people out to be things they are not is a bedrock belief of justifying anything and everything. That's why when you call someone Hitler and a fascist and a racist and someone who wants to wipe out a group of people because of who they sleep with you can justify almost anything. Even when none of the base accusations are really true at all. A lot of people have become the hate filled horrors of humans beings they claim to detest so much. It's a tragedy.

 

[Clemblack]

"global black studies".


lol

 

[Trading Tiger]

I think his actions/comments are distasteful, but there's certainly some irony in wanting him fired for mocking the death of someone who was very well known for mocking the death of other people.

The deceased person also put out numerous videos elucidating his position that the notion of empathy was weak and useless (I certainly don't agree with that idea, either).

No, there's nothing ironic about upholding the law. Immortality, unprofessional conduct, violation of board rules...more than meets the requirement for dismissal.

 

[tboonpickens]

 

[TigerGrowls]

Good. Clemson should do the same.

 

[TigerGrowls]

 

[Johnny Mundo]

Some of yall are fvcked in the head… it’s a University’s obligation to promote safety and well being of the students. If a University deems that professor or someone on staff is a threat they can definitely get rid of that person. Parents, grandparents, legal guardians want to make sure their kids are taken care of and the university does have a responsibility to the family that it will do just that.

 

[TigerGrowls]

 

[TigerGrowls]

 

[TigerGrowls]

 

[TigerGrowls]

 

[Baldinger's Finger]

Say what ever you want, the dude can be fired. Greenville county fired a teacher.

Sure they can and they can also both be sued for violating the law. Whether they win depends on a variety of factors that I pointed out. I’m guessing lawsuits will follow.

 

[Rastafarian]

I have never listened to Kirk but was sent this article yesterday of some of his views. He said some absolutely disgusting things that were founded in white supremecy, sexism, bigotry, etc. in general he didn’t think anyone who wasn’t a Christian white male should have power in the US. Thats antithetical of what this country was founded upon.

I am sure hearing this was painful for the professor especially knowing how many young males Kirk indoctrinated because apparently he was a very talented orator. What the professor did is wrong and he should be reprimanded but the outrage should’ve been directed at Kirk for his hateful rhetoric.

Charlie Kirk in his own words: ‘prowling Blacks’ and ‘the great replacement strategy’

The far-right commentator didn’t pull his punches when discussing his bigoted views on current events

www.theguardian.com

 

[FLaw47]

I think that firing people for some of the comments is bordering on beta behavior but I understand the desire. If, however, you didn't think people should be fired for their comments on the attack of Paul Pelosi and the assassinations of the Minnesota lawmakers, you're just raging hypocrites.

 

[TigerGrowls]

 

[Clemblack]

I think that firing people for some of the comments is bordering on beta behavior but I understand the desire. If, however, you didn't think people should be fired for their comments on the attack of Paul Pelosi and the assassinations of the Minnesota lawmakers, you're just raging hypocrites.

Pelosi's attack was a little different and he wasn't killed. agree on Minnesota. who is arguing to the contrary?

 

[ANEW]

I have never listened to Kirk but....

Typical.

Lots of video out there of him engaging in conversations with all comers on college campuses. Actually asking people who disagreed with him to jump ahead in the line to ask questions or engage in debate. And for that they killed him. Widowed a young wife and orphaned two little kids.

Hope all these disgusting academics lose their jobs.

 

[FLaw47]

Pelosi's attack was a little different and he wasn't killed. agree on Minnesota. who is arguing to the contrary?

Why was the Pelosi attack different (aside from Paul living)? I haven't seen anyone arguing it in this thread yet. I just strongly suspect that a lot of the people in this thread who are trying to get people fired were completely fine when similar comments were made about those attacks. Charlie Kirk, in fact, encouraged people in the area to try to bail out Paul Pelosi's attacker.

I'm mostly fine with someone so long as they're demonstrating some rhetorical consistency.

 

[ANEW]

Such a shame. But im sure there are lots of great paying jobs in misissippi for publically fired academics at the local piggly wiggly. It's probably hard to keep good solid grocery baggers.

Thanks this has turned into real feel good thread this morning.

Edit: wow I just went back to the beginning of the thread...definitely a feel good thread before this morning. Im just late seeing g it

 

[UrHuckleberry]

Pelosi's attack was a little different and he wasn't killed. agree on Minnesota. who is arguing to the contrary?

I personally missed the calls for Senator Mike Lee to resign or impeached.

 

[Clemblack]

I personally missed the calls for Senator Mike Lee to resign or impeached.

maybe he should resign. I don't know who he is or what he did.


I'd also point out that Charlie Kirk was an absolute rock star and not many people cared about or knew the Minnesota person. I think that's another important difference here. To be clear, almost no death should be celebrated.

 

[UrHuckleberry]

maybe he should resign. I don't know who he is or what he did.


I'd also point out that Charlie Kirk was an absolute rock star and not many people cared about or knew the Minnesota person. I think that's another important difference here. To be clear, almost no death should be celebrated.

One was also an official part of the government, and the other was not. I would recommend you google Mike Lee and his reaction to the assassination of multiple people. You just asked who is arguing to the contrary, so it seemed like you wanted consistency. Was saying the same.

 

[ChicagoTiger85]

I have never listened to Kirk but was sent this article yesterday of some of his views. He said some absolutely disgusting things that were founded in white supremecy, sexism, bigotry, etc. in general he didn’t think anyone who wasn’t a Christian white male should have power in the US. Thats antithetical of what this country was founded upon.

I am sure hearing this was painful for the professor especially knowing how many young males Kirk indoctrinated because apparently he was a very talented orator. What the professor did is wrong and he should be reprimanded but the outrage should’ve been directed at Kirk for his hateful rhetoric.

Charlie Kirk in his own words: ‘prowling Blacks’ and ‘the great replacement strategy’

The far-right commentator didn’t pull his punches when discussing his bigoted views on current events

www.theguardian.com

I wasn’t a fan of Kirk because I thought he was needlessly provocative, indulged some of the dumber topics on the right, and was sycophantic towards Trump. However, you’re mischaracterizing his intentionally indelicate statements about affirmative action.

The intentional offensiveness is why some people are having a hard time being decent about his assassination. They wonder if he’d do the same about somebody of a different persuasion. That’s understandable, but not a good justification. You don’t engender more decency by being indecent.

One thing I’ve noticed with some of these events recently is there’s almost a performative cycle of goading people into being indecent, and then people doubling down on indecency just to prove they don’t care what the other side thinks. Celebrating somebody’s death and having the first thing that comes to your mind be that they deserved it because they were annoying is bad; hoping people do lots of that and hunting for it around the internet so you can confirm your own negative beliefs about people you disagree and so you can flex over them isn’t great, either.

 

[MTTiger19]

The fascinating case study of these people. Even if you believe it to be true.

You are either willing to reduce your own morality to the same deplorable level that you despise by participating in the same behavior or you simply reside in the same dark place to begin with.

The lack of self awareness at the “intelligent” class is stunning.

A leftist on here this morning was explaining to me how he understands why Charlie Kirk was murdered for his rhetoric. Wtf? Like how do you not know that you’ve been calling everyone Nazis for the last decade. They have zero self awareness. That’s righteous indignation at a level we’ve never seen before. They’ve convinced themselves of their superior morality and intellect and that’s justified their violence. Bunch of sick assholus.

 

[creekside tiger]

The fascinating case study of these people. Even if you believe it to be true.

You are either willing to reduce your own morality to the same deplorable level that you despise by participating in the same behavior or you simply reside in the same dark place to begin with.

The lack of self awareness at the “intelligent” class is stunning.

To celebrate the assassination of someone because of their views is sick on so many levels & the professor deserves immediate termination! Sen. Mike Lee of Utah also deserves to be censured for mocking the assassination of the Minnesota senator & her husband in June. This hateful rhetoric from both sides must stop! Charlie Kirk’s family deserves better!

 

[TigerGrowls]

One was also an official part of the government, and the other was not. I would recommend you google Mike Lee and his reaction to the assassination of multiple people. You just asked who is arguing to the contrary, so it seemed like you wanted consistency. Was saying the same.

What did Mike Lee say....plz link it.

 

[UrHuckleberry]

What did Mike Lee say....plz link it.

 

[TigerGrowls]

View attachment 911002

Ok. I do t like it but it's directed at Tim Walz who is alive. Am I missing something?

 

[TigerGrowls]

 

[TigerGrowls]

 

[JohnHughsPartner]

I think that firing people for some of the comments is bordering on beta behavior but I understand the desire. If, however, you didn't think people should be fired for their comments on the attack of Paul Pelosi and the assassinations of the Minnesota lawmakers, you're just raging hypocrites.

Well if anyone knows anything about beta behavior, it’d be a limp wristed dem

 

[ChicagoTiger85]

Ok. I do t like it but it's directed at Tim Walz who is alive. Am I missing something?

What you’re missing is that Lee took the opportunity of the assassination of two MN Reps to try to criticize the politics of somebody he disagreed with. What mattered to him is that he could use it against Walz, which really required twisted logic to begin with.

A lot of these reactions from people who celebrate political assassinations and from people who really want to find people celebrating so they can be doxxed almost seem like the people don’t understand this is real life.