A surprising campus free speech problem: left-wingers fired for their opinions

You are in college for one reason and one reason alone: education. College shouldn't be used as a platform for politicking. If you wish to do politics or activism do it outside the campus. Just like how you would if you were in school or a work environment. Why should colleges be an exception to the rule?

It's ridiculous that college students are used for furthering political agendas. Campuses have become a hotbed for politicians and activists alike. They no longer need to do the hard work of visiting neighborhoods and interacting directly with people about their problems. They have a readily available resource in the form of college students whom they can influence. Lest we forget about peer pressure students face: you are in our group as long as you align with our political ideology/activism.

And what is the point of inviting speakers when everyone is pretty much divided and will never accept the other's views? This entire process just creates more fissures than bridge gaps.

It's sickening that we as a society allow this in the first place. And this isn't just a societal issue but also an ethical issue: should taxpayer money be used to fund such events when it was provided to further education standards?

This isn't just restricted to the US; it's pretty much a worldwide phenomenon.

Who are the people that we are sending off to college?

I don't believe that the vast majority of kids are intellectually nor morally challenged enough before they enter the college atmosphere and those that do give profound thought to life (i.e. why is it OK for the president to curse and say borderline racist things in his speeches but thought provoking books with similar sounding rhetoric are banned from schools) are typically ostracized from the rest of society for not conforming.

Along with social media and the competitiveness of this country for getting ahead in life, college kids, possibly unwittingly, fight tooth and nail to align with others in solidarity of causes and opinions that were never properly reflected upon before by the individual but because they want to maintain friendships or make new ones or even put themselves out there for the sake of personal vanity or gain, you now suddenly see the blind leading the charge against opposing opinions and rhetoric, but to what end?

Instead of people telling others how they should feel about every topic and what side they need to take, people really need to focus on why they care so much in the first place about anything in general and equally important, recognize when they are being trolled just for the sake of getting a reaction out of them.

I notice the usual undertone here that universal free speech is an inherently good thing. While I personally believe that wholeheartedly, I've spoken with a non-negligable number of students who've come to the conclusion that free speech is not an inherent right shared by everyone, and that they are justified in trying to quash the free speech of those they disagree with.

The dispute over campus free speech isn't going to go anywhere until it's acknowledged that not everyone wants free speech.

>Some campus free speech critics, I suspect, aren’t operating in good faith. For them, the entire debate is a way to attack universities as hopelessly and dangerously liberal — to undermine higher education for nakedly partisan reasons.

This is almost assuredly so. However, I find it curious that partisans would seek to attack an institution, unless the institution were itself seen as nonpartisan. And wonder whether there is any truth to that perception. What causes said perception?

The article is claiming that a new study was just released, but the closest thing I can find is a Knight Foundation study that was done in March. Can anyone find the study the article is referring to? It doesn't seem to be in any of their links.