IMHO, radical clarity here requires acknowledging the legal and principled differences between higher ed and K through 12 as well as the distinction between teaching versus promoting material.

Some Constitutionally protected speech, like hard core pornography, should absolutely be banned from first and second grade classrooms.

Some heinous ideas, like Nazi ideology, should be taught as part of history education, but absolutely never promoted or endorsed.
If you have public schools, which some anarchists and libertarians don't want, you have to bite the bullet and recognize that the state will be including some ideas and excluding others from curriculum. Some matters of controversy should be debated. But not all. Example:
Young people should be taught the debates around the death penalty and abortion. They should not be debating whether Jews are inferior or whether white people are devils or whether the U.S. government should initiate a genocide.
Lots of judgment calls k through 12 schools regularly make, with bipartisan support, would be utterly inappropriate violations of the 1st Amendment or academic freedom if done in colleges.
Some Republican bills would indeed constrain colleges in inappropriate ways. (Some go too far in K through 12 too.)

Ironically, another faction that wants to narrow what speech is protected *even in higher Ed and under the First Amendment* is: Critical Race Theorists.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Conor Friedersdorf

Conor Friedersdorf Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @conor64

10 Jun
Attention Californians and journalists: you should know about Assembly Bill 343 and Assemblyman Vince Fong's important, long-running efforts to strengthen the CA Public Records Act (1/x)
On paper journalists and all CA residents have a right to broad categories of public information. But as many reporters have discovered, bureaucrats often turn down legitimate requests, leaving no recourse except filing an expensive lawsuit (2/x)
Fong wants to create an independent ombudsperson to settle denied Public Records Act requests, creating a mechanism other than lawsuits to vindicate the rights of CA residents and journalists. And his bill passed the Assembly unanimously, but still faces the Senate and governor
Read 5 tweets
29 May
I get the market for mass market "macrobrews" and for "microbrews" and even for stuff in between but I don't get this "limited edition":
Nor do I get this "pure" Coors Light. What's in the other stuff?!
But apparently it's a thing because there's competition
Read 4 tweets
28 May
Is it okay to generalize about a racial or gender group on the basis of something that is true of a mere plurality of its members? A majority? A supermajority? For many the answer is *that depends on the standard's implications for the ideological point I'm trying to make.*
So, for example, it's objectionable to be cisnormative, because it erases the small percentage of people who are trans; and Model Minority Myth is objectionable; but speaking of white people as possessing wealth privilege is fine. The logic is wildly inconsistent.
The correct insight that *Asian Americans are wealthy* obscures and elides e.g. *recent Hmong immigrants* and the correct insight that *white people have family wealth privilege* elides e.g. white Appalachian kids born into deeply indebted families are very similar.
Read 4 tweets
24 May
This @benyt article about dysfunction in public radio reminds me that I've been meaning to pose a question about ReplyAll and its return-after-controversy episode:…
In the episode they say they spent *two months* drilling down and reflecting on what went wrong (ostensibly! I add) with their piece on Bon Appetit. But then they... don't ever level with the audience.
The most we get is the assertion that 1) journalists should always ask, "Am I the right one to tell this story?" and the claim that 2) they didn't ask or adequately interrogate if they were the right ones to tell *that* story.

Both 1 and 2 were glaringly underdeveloped.
Read 9 tweets
22 May
Apropos this convo between @benyt and @WesleyLowery on the convention of "objectivity," inspired by the unjust firing of an Associated Press reporter, I'm reminded of an obscure but powerful example of how that conceit has gone wrong that I'm privy to for personal reasons. 1/x
It will surprise some of you to learn that in 2011 some Occupy Wall Street protesters put a critique of Goldman Sachs that I wrote on a protest sign and chanted my words on the streets of New York City. 2/x
The sentence in question, describing a dubious deal Goldman did, was, shall we say, amusingly unwieldy--had I known it might appear on a sign I'd have done one more draft.

Nevertheless, you can watch the protest video here:
Read 8 tweets
3 May
Actually, the whole conference is online now, so a quick thread. Here's the always excellent and nuanced Randall Kennedy on race and freedom of expression
The next session was "What are the empirical facts about lack of intellectual diversity in academia and what are the causes of existing imbalances?"

"To what degree is this a problem?" panel

Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!