Thread by @JeffreyASachs

I can't tell if Rufo is misinformed or simply using words differently that I do, but honestly who cares? I'm just going to post two bills below. I'll supply a few prompts, but you read them and make up your own mind.

https://twitter.com/realchrisrufo/status/1365681150157496322

First, Arkansas HB 1218, a bill entitle... You know what? The title is way too long for a single tweet. Here's a screenshot instead.

arkleg.state.ar.us/Bills/FTPDocum…

Read the bill carefully. Note what is covered and what is not. It does carve out exceptions (Sec 1.f), but pay close attention to their limits.

Now ask yourself, were this bill to pass, could a professor endorse race-based affirmative action in the classroom?

Next, New Hampshire HB 544. It's even worse. Again, read it carefully, noting the concession to academic freedom in the General Provisions. But note as well the section "Unlawful Propagation of Divisive Concepts."

gencourt.state.nh.us/bill_status/bi…

Under this bill, could a prof endorse the idea that, because of sexism, men enjoy a higher status or privilege in electoral politics? Not "Some people argue that" or "This is one theory among many", but rather "I, a political scientist, affirmatively state that this is the case."

Let me level with you. What Rufo wants is really very reasonable: To prohibit bad speech but permit good speech.

I want that too! But that bill does not exist. It cannot exist. It certainly doesn't exist in Arkansas or New Hampshire.

Instead we have bills so poorly written that they will absolutely, without a doubt be abused. If it helps, imagine that California wrote an SJW version of them, with all the nouns switched around and the arrows pointing the other way.

Still think academic freedom is protected?

Obviously none of this thread applies to you if you don't care about free speech or academic freedom. If that's you, I've wasted your time.

But if you do care, what Rufo is trying to do should terrify you. It terrifies me. And it's time to push back.