Home

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Excellent

  • Aug. 25th, 2008 at 10:01 PM
side-beard-flip
via [info]hgfalling, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education has placed an ad in US News & World Report's annual college issue, highlighting the five colleges and universities that have earned FIRE's Red Alert distinction for being the "worst of the worst" when it comes to liberty on campus.

Here's the ad.

"Gentleman...We're going to hit them in the payroll!"

Comments

[info]octal wrote:
Aug. 26th, 2008 05:15 am (UTC)
I guess it's bad that my first response is "who has heard of Valdosa State University or Colorado College"?
[info]litch wrote:
Aug. 26th, 2008 06:36 am (UTC)
it does tend to reveal your parochialism
(Anonymous) wrote:
Aug. 26th, 2008 07:21 am (UTC)
That's damn smart marketing. Like Mad Men quality brilliance.

- Micha
[info]rickthefightguy wrote:
Aug. 26th, 2008 01:44 pm (UTC)
I didn't do a ton of reading their site, but it looks like they pick single events for each of the schools. I would expect that to be the worst of the worst one would want to see a pattern.

(Disclosure: I am a Brandeis alum)
[info]jminnis wrote:
Aug. 26th, 2008 11:12 pm (UTC)
I seem to recall that there were other events at Brandeis. I tried to find more, but the FIRE website is organized poorly for locating less recent events.
[info]zuleikhajami wrote:
Aug. 26th, 2008 02:01 pm (UTC)
Yeah, unless Brandeis has changed a lot since I graduated, it has no business being labeled one of the "worst of the worst." One high profile incident does not demonstrate a severe and ongoing disregard!

Likewise, Tufts had no pattern of disregarding faculty or students' rights when I was at Brandeis. The case against them is not very clear cut, IMHO. FIRE preserved the controversial pages in The Primary Source, and I am hard pressed to see an argument for parody or satire on either. FIRE doesn't summarize the case, so I'm not sure what happened to the students. Maybe it was disproportionate (although I'm not sure what I think would be disproportionate--it depends on whether the paper receives university funding and what stipulations are attached to that). But unless there's a heck of a lot of context that FIRE's not preserving, it's not like the students wrote a parody or satire that was taken literally.
[info]emtel wrote:
Aug. 26th, 2008 05:06 pm (UTC)
But, but... surely you aren't arguing that the right of these institutions to free association should be abridged!
[info]patrissimo wrote:
Aug. 26th, 2008 09:47 pm (UTC)
Huh? How does supporting an effort to inform potential customers of negative things about a product have anything to do with abridging the rights of free association?
[info]jminnis wrote:
Aug. 26th, 2008 11:09 pm (UTC)
I'm with Patri here. All they've done is call attention to bad acts and recommend that people not attend the schools in question. How does that affect freedom of association?
[info]emtel wrote:
Aug. 26th, 2008 11:30 pm (UTC)
thefire.org uses language like: "See who else is violating individual rights on campus" and "FIRE Exposes Unrepentant Abusers of Liberty in ‘U.S. News’ College Rankings Issue". They don't use language like "Find out which colleges will expel you (within their rights) for doing certain things."

Now, I happen to agree with them, I was just pointing out that it's not very orthodox from a libertarian stance to say that FIRE is concerned with "liberty on campus", since the libertarian.

I also recognize that you never said anything along the lines of "we should pass a law against expelling people for protesting parking garages", but I was surprised you would associate yourself with an organization that thinks (quite reasonably, imho) that a university shouldn't be able to terminate their voluntary contract with you for exercising your 1st amendment rights.
[info]emtel wrote:
Aug. 26th, 2008 11:31 pm (UTC)
er, ignore the fragment after the last comma in the second paragraph.
[info]patrissimo wrote:
Aug. 27th, 2008 03:18 am (UTC)
I was applauding their ad, not their entire ideology.

One thing to note is that some of the schools they criticize are publicly-funded, and thus the whole "voluntary contract" idea goes out the window, and the idea that they should be forced to obey the Constitution starts to make a lot more sense.
(Anonymous) wrote:
Aug. 27th, 2008 03:30 pm (UTC)
more information
FIRE's Brandeis Case Archive: http://www.thefire.org/index.php/schools/2482

FIRE's Tuft Case Archive: http://www.thefire.org/index.php/schools/762

Latest Month

July 2009
S M T W T F S
   1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031 

Tags

Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Tiffany Chow