Someone wrote ‘Trump 2016′ on campus. Some students say they don't feel safe
washingtonpost.com
washingtonpost.com
Challenge your own beliefs, and those of others. If you think someone is wrong in their beliefs, discuss, debate and convince them so - and don't be surprised if you learn something too
Speaking as a millennial. If you need a safe space at the university you will get walked all over in the real world.
Same with raising small children. I got scrapes and stitches as a kid and most of the people I grew up with broke a bone at one point. We didn't die. We're actually stronger for it. Yet most parents these days freak out if their kid trips (even if there isn't any blood). When that happened to me, we washed it, stuck on a bandage and went back to playing 2 minutes later.
The only way things will change if people stop hiding from problems in these safe spaces and confront them and learn from them.
This is what I thought as well; surely the tougher and more resilient person is more valued to an organization.
But most elite organizations now participate in a grievance culture. For example Hulk Hogan will now receive more in damages against Gawker than all the money he has earned through hard work and perseverance in his entire life.
In this new world of ours, the louder and more viral your grievance goes, the more power and influence you can earn, compared to the suckers keeping their head down and taking the good with the bad.
Incentives still rule behavior - and the truth about the colleges especially is that playing the victim card is lucrative. If you're unprepared to deal with people demanding a safe space, and unprepared to demand one for yourself when right political situation arises, you will get walked all over in life.
The question is: what, if anything, will take their place?
I do believe the school should treat the political graffiti like any other graffiti, and simply remind students that threatening actual violence (or committing such) continues to be forbidden, as does altering school property, and that people are going to have differing viewpoints on different stuff, and that they need to be able to act with civility regardless. But the anxiety really should be addressed, as it is truly more than simply being offended at some chalked words on campus.Which, with Trump's anti-them sort of retoric, might make me a bad american simply by my living choice. Really sucks.
I'm also not saying you have to be OK with the message - just that rather than trying to shut down the people making statements, they should be engaged and challenged.
And perhaps you should allow that speech the same way I wouldn't be okay with Hillaray 2016 who spearheaded the effort to create the situation in Syria (along with Lybia Egypt and Iraq) which has caused the deaths of over 500k people and tens of millions of homeless.
If one of the presidential contenders doesn't make you safe, I would think Hillary would be first to mind with bloody deadly wars in the wake of her only tenure in real power.
Since the First Amendment only restricts the actions of the federal (and by extension the state and local) government, it only applies to universities run by the government (e.g., state universities). Private universities like Emory are not bound by the First Amendment any more than a shopping mall is. However, there are other ways to pressure universities to allow freedom of speech: exposing their actions in the press, alumni cutting off financial support, etc.
I think you're right about Hillary, but what does that have to do with this conversation?
If you or your family is here illegally then you do so with the understanding that you might be deported. There's certainly good arguments to be made that our immigration policies need to be changed, but "beef up border security and deport current illegals" is absolutely a valid proposal and one that's supported by a large number of both American and Mexican nationals (who are hardly fond of Nicaraguan immigrants). It may not be the view I personally hold but adding ridiculous hyperbole and unbridled emotion into your stance makes it hard to take seriously.
And where on earth did you get "physical violence" from?
Edit: forgot his campaign manager http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/breitbart-s-michelle-fie...
It is my understanding the breitbart woman was proven to be lying about what actually happened by multiple videos showing the "incident". I hadn't even heard about it before today but even a cursory google gave me this (admittedly poorly done) video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6NoMPxomjiw so maybe you shouldn't spread that.
She said she almost fell but kept her balance. http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2016/03/10/3276486/
Edit: that's why "aiding and abetting" or "conspiracy to" commit crimes is also a crime.
Chalking 'Trump 2016' is a decidedly non-violent action.
You might find it offensive, distasteful, disrespectful, or any number of other adjectives, but it is not in any way violent.
I say this as someone who does not support Donald Trump or his policies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Black_Panther_Party_voter_...
but, like you probably said (in your head), he wasn't convicted, so he must have been innocent... not quite the way others saw it though...
Whoever did this is personally threatening students on campus. If they were just supporting Trump I would have a lot less problem with this.
Which is not what Trump said by the way. As I mentioned in another post I don't support Trump (and neither am I even able to vote in US elections) and I have no horse in this race, but if you're going to criticise him, at least do it for things he said, not for exaggerations of what you think he said.
> Whoever did this is personally threatening students on campus
No, what happened was entirely impersonal, and not threatening in any way unless you perform a large amount of mental and linguistic gymnastics.
I fail to see how chalking 'trump 2016' is 'clearly aimed at Latino students'?
Latinos are not the only group he has marginalised, but even then maybe it was written by someone who supports some other policies of his or by someone who wants to see some fresh names in politics beyond just Clinton/Bush.
From what I can tell many of Trump's supporters don't like all his policies either. What they like is that he is unlike any other politician running for office and that he has enough of his own money that his words aren't bought and paid for by others.
In debating you learn you cannot make a convincing argument without thoroughly understanding your opponents arguments and lines of reasoning.
If you think the only reason people want to vote for Trump is because they are rascist and intend for violence to be committed against certain groups in society, then you will fail to convince most of them not to vote for Trump, because that is not what they want or believe.
Are you saying you don't feel safe walking around the US knowing that ICE or CBP deport people?
A friend of my wife had her Asian-White child told at school that when Trump becomes president and builds a wall that she will have to leave the country.
These are may be relatively isolated incidents, but I think "Trump" (the name not the person) is becoming a racial slur to sling at someone (regardless of if he is attempting to).
While likely this chalking is merely someone who supports Trump for president, to many it is the same as writing "You don't belong here and soon we are going to kick you out."