Fake petition at Yale: repeal the First Amendment

@CIEE83 “I agree that many current undergrads would be very willing to ban hate speech. But that’s VERY different from willingly signing a petition to repeal freedom of speech.” Well, you know what? Maybe a lot of Yalies just didn’t get that distinction before Horowitz approached them. Is that really so hard to believe? Now, there are conversations happening about the importance of the first amendment. I agree with what a few others have said that that is a good thing.

*By the way, remember that it wasn’t a petition to repeal only “freedom of speech” but the entire first amendment, which includes freedom of religion, press, and association, too.

I think it is a manufactured controversy, just like the incident in the Silliman courtyard and the protests after Lukianoff’'s joke at the Buckley Conference and the “White Christmas” incident described on another thread. I suspect there will be more. I understand that many of you here absolutely believe something completely different, and this thread won’t change anyone’s mind. Still, sometimes it’s good to know there is another point of view.

Wanting to see Yale students get their just deserts because of their overweening pride was a new idea to me. It was surprising, though I don’t really know why. The last couple of years, it seemed we were beyond student bashing threads. They sure seem popular here at the moment, and in the wider internet world and mainstream media. It’s interesting to me what that means, if anything.

Yeah, it is. It’s the distinction between being dopey and being stupid. Plenty of Yale students are the former; not so many the latter.

I don’t really perceive any of the “just deserts” sentiment. We pretty much commented in the same manner in the threads on University of Missouri, Oberlin, Claremont and all the others. Slightly different scenarios but criticism was not spared. One might believe the “manufactured controversy” theory once, but after that it becomes a stretch and might be classified as burying one’s head in the sand.

In this particular case I don’t ascribe any lack of intelligence to the Yale students - they are clearly a talented group. I just think the protests and activism on campuses have reached critical mass and that affects the culture and the students. My own best guess is that the signatures were a result of one of two things. The students may have been simply jumping on the band wagon that currently permeates the campus and were not in “critical thinking” mode as they walked across campus. Just a reflexive action constituting a “yeah I am with you and support your cause.” Or they were afraid of the backlash that might be forthcoming if they declined. And that makes some sense to me after the Christakis incident. The second scenario is more worrisome to me.

I doubt this. Despite what Horowitz claimed, the vast majority of Yale students would ignore anybody with any kind of petition. There would be no backlash for declining to sign a petition like this.

Did I not understand TheGFC in post #150?

Yes, I think the general public is all too eager to see Ivy Leaguers cut down to size, and that was likely one reason Horowitz did the experiment at Yale…

^^^^
That is another poster expressing one possibility of why Horowitz did the experiment. My comment was that I do not see that sentiment expressed here on this thread - meaning other posters are not expressly trying to belittle Yale students. They are simply calling out the behavior as they see it.

I don’t see anyone taking any “glee” in it.

He implies in the video that Yale was chosen because of Shrieking Girl. Other campus videos he has made were done on other campuses.

Here is in which he waves an ISIS flag on Berkeley’s campus with no response, but when he waves an Israeli flag he catches grief.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wOHJ06bsSow

In this one he interviews students at UC Berkeley about the Tennessee killings of American soldiers.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AA_2auelvcI

Finally, in this one he interviews a UC-Irvine student who wants to ban the America Flag on campus because it causes a hostile environment.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQ8vQVBLpSc

In the course of reading about Horowitz, I ran across an internet article “explaining” the ISIS/Israeli flag videos with regard to times of day and where the flags were displayed. It was pretty interesting (to me) and if I can find it again, I’ll post a link. It is pretty difficult to find anything but enthusiastic support for his work on line. Lots of folks really seem to love him and the videos he makes.

It also seems like a lot of people wouldn’t talk to someone with an ISIS flag because (at least to me) it would seem that anyone holding such a flag at Berkeley is either dangerous or trying to stir up controversy. It’s not like they’re likely to be recruiting.
Not that there’s much of a reason to go out and wave an Israeli flag either, but it’s less likely that that person will physically attack if you say something to them.

@Ohiodad51 - I am fairly sure that the words “it’s from Fox, they suck” did not emerge from any keyboard of mine. And are you suggesting that it’s not fair to consider the source of the information? Or would you only consider the source if it was the “lame stream media?”

Several here have suggested, including your previous post, that the fact the video aired in Fox was a reason to question its veracity. While I would agree that the known biases of any media outlet can inform the quality of any editorializing and the decision to broadcast certain information, we are discussing the content of a video. For the life of me I can not understand how the media outlet that broadcast the video has any impact on its veracity.

^^ Since videos can be edited selectively or filmed using actors, it is entirely reasonable to consider the source, particularly since this video is not, and does not purport to be, a news report. It was a satire, and I do find it conceivable that creative liberties were taken with the raw material.

I think a lot of it was a joke…

I also find it ironic that those against PC want to make comments saying that “our constitution is not a joking manner” or “the 1st amendment is sacred” so that we can’t poke fun at things like this. Oddly enough, that in itself is a form of political correctness. It argues that it’s fine to make comments that may offend minority groups or something or other, but God forbid someone touches the constitution. Believe it or not, “PC” in actuality is not just a liberal concept, however it is currently only being applied to liberal ideas.

If I see a bunch of cameras rolling while someone asks me to “repeal the 1st amendment” I’m going to assume they’re joking, and I may actually take the time to humor them. With that said, I think that there are enough super-liberals at Yale to compromise some of those signatures. The truth probably lies between the two extremes presented in this thread, and while PC likely is an issue on college campuses, I don’t think this helps make a convincing case.

Wow, I have always thought of myself as very liberal, but I must look like the Constitution Party on Yale’s campus. I know that some parts of the constitution may not be 100% agreeable to today’s ideologies, but it is rightly the Supreme Law of the United States. The first amendment is the most important one. When you infringe on the right to free speech, press, etc. you start going down a slippery slope. Universities already have the right to ban people for being offensive, so there’s no need to tamper with the CONSTITUTION.

Or maybe we have no idea how much of this video is actually an accurate representation of Yale students, and it is likely that only a very tiny minority of Yale students (if any) are interested in repealing the first amendment.

The vast majority of students on any campus ignore petitions. That is why the people who stopped, listened and signed it, way more than not, really hold that position.

Typical “shoot the messenger” meme - requires no thinking to say that. Pretty much no different than the Yale students who signed the thing - not thinking.

In addition, it is surprising the basic logic lost on people who jumped to say these may not be Yale students and it is fake etc. Do people not realize the petition was signed? Therefore, there are names, which are easily searched in 30 seconds, and Horowitz knows if they are Yale students or not. I am going to even bet that he only included verifiable Yale students in the video. The legal implications of saying Yale students on the video lead and staging it is not worth it. He makes his money by showing stupidity of real people that others think should know better.

And I bet that Yale was advised the same as well not to say it was fake just because of this fact that Horowitz could produce the signatures, names, and match them to actual Yale students. Would make Yale look pretty stupid to say it was fake when they know he has more than just a verbal yes or no on video, and it has not a clue what else he has on video.

There are stupid students on every campus, even if they are deemed book smart. I have interviewed plenty and just laughed after they left.

D1 is an ultra-liberal Yalie who socializes with lots of other ultra-liberal Yalies (and conservatives, too, I might add). I haven’t heard her or any of her friends advocating for restrictions on freedom of expression – and neither has she.

I wouldn’t describe the 1st Amendment as ‘uniquely American’. Many other countries, notably India, explicitly guarantee the right to free speech in the consitutions. The US can, however, be credited with having the oldest formal protection for free speech, but not the only one