The thing you seem to have missed here is that the person who (wrongly) lost their job did not work in academia, but for a corporation.
While there are fierce debates about speech on campus, you have much weaker free speech protections in corporate America.
While there are fierce debates about speech on campus, you have much weaker free speech protections in corporate America.
Also, the person who attacked the guy who got fired is not in academia.
Basically, a private corporation fired an employee because an activist criticized him. That is wrong, but its not about academia.
If the same argument happened within academia, no-one would lose their job.
Basically, a private corporation fired an employee because an activist criticized him. That is wrong, but its not about academia.
If the same argument happened within academia, no-one would lose their job.
Lindsay misleadingly presents the firing of an employee from a private company as being from academia and then goes on a rant about how critical theory engages in fact-free argument. Amazing.
if you believe in free speech and different perspectives, the best solution is not call for the elimination of novel academic perspectives of deep problems, as Lindsay does, but to provide robust protections for different views, which academia does.
This reminds me of the time the President threatened to pull federal funding from UC Berkeley because two people, neither of whom were connected to the university, got into a fight on its campus.
This entire discourse is insane. Of more than 30 responses, only one other guy points out that Lindsay is making a factually inaccurate claim. Everyone else just piles on about what a threat to facts and reason academia is, without having read the piece they are outraged about.
