Campus Free Speech

'You Do Not As a White Cis Man Tell Me to Calm Down!' Angry Students Overwhelm YAF Meeting

Kansas students who hate the Constitution are making good use of the First Amendment.

|

YAF
Screenshot via YAF

It happened again: After clashing with conservative students at the University of Kansas two weeks ago, leftists once again overran a meeting of the campus's Young Americans for Freedom chapter.

They had been invited to attend the meeting by the head of YAF, although I presume he did not expect dozens of them to show up—and to interrupt so frequently as to make any dialogue impossible.

YAF released an edited two-minute clip of the meeting, which gives us some idea of what happened. A black woman—the same student from the last meeting, apparently the leader of the leftists—accused a conservative of engaging in hate speech shortly after calling him an "entitled ass." Eventually, this woman and another female student began shouting and banging their hands on the table, which prompted one YAF member to ask them to calm down.

"You do not get to tell me to calm down!" thundered the second woman. "You do not as a cis white man tell me to calm the fuck down!"

The student is of course welcome to speak as loudly and angrily as she wants—she might even have good reasons to be passionate. As far as I know, YAF invited these students to come, so I would not say that anyone's free speech rights were violated.

That said, the hypocrisy displayed by the leftists here is remarkable. They believe they have the right to speak as loudly and rudely as they wish—that no one gets to shut them down. At the same time, they favor some version of censorship for conservative students: They assert the right to be made "safe" from ideas that offend them, or make them uncomfortable. And they despise YAF for arguing against these kinds of safe spaces.

But if Kansas's campus were to become a safe space—and if the university were to enforce a policy of obligatory emotional comfort in a remotely even-handed way—it's the liberal students would who feel the brunt of the censorship. You can't organize a mob, bang on tables, and scream in people's faces while simultaneously insisting that everybody's subjective feelings of discomfort should trump free speech. These leftist students have a lot of contempt for the Constitution—they say so in the video—and yet they are completely reliant upon the protection of the First Amendment, which gives them the right to shout hurtful things at people who disagree with them.

Advertisement

NEXT: 81-Year-Old Woman's Single Marijuana Plant Seized in Raid by National Guard and State Police

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. The student is of course welcome to speak as loudly and angrily as she wants?she might even have good reasons to be passionate.

    You’re going to get comments.

    1. Oh my god. Get that boy a Banana Tempura Roll stat!

      1. Hmm. That actually sounds pretty damned good.

        1. If you call it Bananas Foster it’s even better…

    2. Instead of going with the typical “Robby always has to equivocate” tack, I’ll go a different route. This is what the YAF deserves for pretending that you can have discourse with these fucks. They’re happy to use and abuse their 1st amendment rights to intimidate, censor, and shut down any intelligent debate. You don’t debate these people for the same reason you don’t debate with a toddler: They’re really stupid, and they’ll throw a tantrum the instant you start to win the discussion.

      1. You are exactly right. There is no point in talking or treating these clowns seriously. They are unworthy of that and should be laughed at and fucked with at every opportunity.

        1. …and should be laughed at and fucked with at every opportunity.

          That’s likely precisely what Young Americans for Freedom is inviting everyone to do by asking these the SJW’s back and recording it.

          1. Yeah, perhaps so, though I would have fucked with them a lot more than YAF did. Just torture them. Make them scream and cry and as miserable as you possibly can make them. Go full 8th grade bully picking on the retarded kid on their sorry asses.

            1. No. You win by not fighting back. You let them thrash you with all the vitriol and hate they can muster. It’s like the early civil rights movement. All the videos of cops unleashing dogs, firing water canons, and beating non-violent protesters was what won allies and eventually the war. If you fuck with the people it only gives them cover for their behavior. It sucks to sit there and take it, but by doing so you prove exactly who the monsters really are.

              Of course fucking with these people is basically a Pyrrhic victory. It’s mutually assured destruction, and to be honest I’m okay with two sets of idiots burning the world to ash. It will be faster than waiting for the heat death of the universe.

        2. There is no point in talking or treating these clowns seriously.

          Clown lives matter

          Sorry, I had to.

        3. It looks to me like their intent was to put the behavior of these clowns on public display. I really doubt that the YAF kids were naive enough to take these clowns seriously. Even if that were so, it would make this a genuine learning experience for the YAF naifs.

      2. Free Speech isn’t free because of assholes like me!

        D.S. al coda

      3. I suspect that the YAF is under no illusions about discourse, seems like they are going out of their way to give these people an opportunity to demonstrate their incivility.

        1. Fair enough. I didn’t want my brain to melt, so I didn’t actually watch the video.

        2. It’s a good strategy. These videos of rabid progs shouting and banging on tables while insulting calm, sensible looking conservatives go a long way in challenging the idea that leftists are “the sane ones.”

          1. Unless the leftists pull some doublethink and say that “INSANITY IS REASON”

        3. Are the actual YAF members the handful of people sitting at the table, and the others are the ones surrounding the table in mass? That ratio of people to cake is too big

      4. You don’t debate these people for the same reason you don’t debate with a toddler: They’re really stupid, and they’ll throw a tantrum the instant you start to win the discussion.

        This X 1,000,000. There’s no discussing anything with these fascist little fucksticks. Better to tell them to all fuck off and die, and then start carrying at your meetings* so that the next time they decide to crash one of your meetings they can get a couple dozen guns pulled on them. Violence, or the threat there of is the only things these cunts understand.

        *Even if that means moving the meetings off campus.

        1. Eh, I agree with the other people that showing normals what psychotic douchebags these people are may be a wise strategy for turning public opinion against them.

          1. True, but it would be emotionally satisfying to read about some of these harpies get the same bullying treatment they subject others to thrown back them a thousand fold.

            At the very least, it would nice to see them try crashing a meeting being held off campus, preferably on someone’s private property, and having them all arrested for trespassing and/ or vandalism (if they start breaking shit as they are wont to do).

          2. Except, what’s your target audience? The school? That’s not going to be a particularly successful strategy. By and large the administration agrees with the psychotic douchebags and have every incentive, courtesy of the administration, to continue to do so. Maybe the legislature. But, I’d be surprised if the YAF is out to get the school screwed.

        2. “You do not get to tell me to calm down!” thundered the second woman. “You do not as a cis white man tell me to calm the fuck down!”

          Bullets…..!

          What about bullets? Lots of em! When do get to have that “discussion”?

      5. Actually, most toddlers are reasonably intelligent and have a real desire to learn more about the world they find themselves in. They should be engaged with verbally in a serious way in order to keep that love of learning alive.

    3. Sorry, wrong. Free speech does not mean you get to shout people down in a campus club meeting. It refers to publishing your ideas, giving speeches, marching, picketing, putting up signs. If these yahoos were picketing outside the YAF meeting, no problem. But to SJWs free speech means they are free to “speak” so loudly no one else can hear or speak. It means they are free to shut you down so you can never have a meeting or invite a speaker. THEIR free speech, not yours.

    4. I only work about for 12k- $15k hours a week from home. Im using an online business opportunity I heard about and I’ve made such great money. Join the many successful people who have already started freelancing over the web. Visit this web and go to tech tab to start your work… http://tinyurl.com/zvrrsk4

  2. The trolling is 20% of maximum today. Only one short hedge paragraph.

    1. Yeah, Robby is really not poking the comentariat today. The bastard.

      1. Poor Robby. Can he do nothing right in the eyes of the commentariat? Besides have glorious hair?

        1. We only do it because we love him and are bitterly jealous of his hair.

          1. As a mid-thirties dude who is starting to get a little thin up top, i have to say you have a point. Watching him flaunt that glorious coif can rankle.

            1. One of my great fortunes in life is having a head of hair that will likely never thin. They say you get your hair genes from your mother. My mother went through radiation and chemo therapy and never lost her hair. We have super hero hair in my family.

              1. They say you get your hair genes from your mother.

                I’ve never heard that before, but either way little trshmnstr is gonna have a full head of hair when s/he is born.

            2. Coif privilege. Also called quiff privilege. Not to be confused with queef privilege.

            3. I have an awesome head of hair, but I find myself taking it for granted. Maybe I could learn something from Robby…

      2. It’s gotten to the point where Robby not trolling us, is Robby trolling us.

        1. ^This, dammit.

    2. I had a second hedge paragraph but I deleted it before publication. FOR YOU.

      1. Dang. I had popcorn and everything.

        1. You just got Soave’d!

      2. Go ahead and put it in the comments, Robby!

      3. I for one would love to see it.

      4. I had a second hedge paragraph but I deleted it before publication. FOR YOU.

        Why would you do that? Are you so sadistic that you would take one of our few joys away from us? There are three things that keep us from having a Jonestown mass-suicide in H&R commenterland. 1) Timely AM Links, 2) Timely PM Links, and 3) A ton of hedging in your articles for us to make fun of. You’re already killing us on #2, why are you trying to finish us off by getting rid of #3?

        1. You’re already killing us on #2, why are you trying to finish us off by getting rid of #3?

          Because he hates you more than SJWs hate cis-hetero white men, duh.

      5. Robby, if you are on PM link duty today, as I fear you are, please do not get distracted by engaging the commenters until after the PM links are posted.

      6. Keep up the good work Fruit Sushi.

  3. Why haven’t these people been kicked out of the school yet?

    1. Kicked out? Their parents are paying top dollar for their maladjusted child to be pushed and patted through accreditation rituals.

      It’s a business Dean, and the heart-thinkers have never been known to invest wisely. E.g. “Gotta get John-qwonda a diploma so xhey will be employable; (and hopefully one day be self aware enough to stop resenting me so much for giving them a nearly risk and cost free education in one of the top 10 GDP per capita nations in the known universe).”

      Kids these days, I tell you ha-whut.

      1. Their parents are paying top dollar

        Maybe. Would be interesting to see a breakdown of who was on need-based scholarships vs. paying full price by club.

        1. More likely they are paying little to nothing while the YAF members finance their ‘education’ by paying full tuition, with some help from us taxpayers.

          1. “…while YAF members finance their ‘education’..”

            Just further evidence of their privilege for which they must be publicly castigated and own the shame thereof.

            White males are all Simon Legree by default. It’s an ok prejudice, because it’s cool and stuff. The pundits all say so. Everyone knows it.

      2. No way in hell that shrieking waste of carbon has parents paying for her tuition, and I’d be surprised if she even made it to freshman year without having to take remedial math and English classes.

        1. shrieking waste of carbon

          I’m gonna have to remember that one.

          1. Yeah, her carbon footprint likely has an abnormal number of toes.

    2. To quote Futurama:

      Leela: “Please… Everyone knows 20th century colleges were basically expensive day care centers.”
      Farnsworth: “That’s true. By current academic standards, you’re merely a high school dropout.”

  4. For God’s sakes tell these people to fuck off and then laugh at them. They are loathsome but also a joke. It would be one thing if they were real no shit violent brown shirts. But they are not. They are pathetic spoiled children and should be treated as such.

    I wish there were some reason for me to be on the college speaking circuit. It would be loads of fun to screw with these people. The more they screamed and cried, the more I would laugh at them and the more fun I would have.

    1. Milo tried, and he got banned from campuses because of it.

      1. No doubt. They banned him for a reason. He was making them look like the complete fools they are. If what Milo was doing hadn’t been effective, they never would have banned him.

        1. I agree. But unfortunately MIlo did nothing to put a dent in their belief that they’re 100% right in doing what they do. He may have made them look like fools to sane people, but…

          1. I don’t think Milo/Fruit Sushi’s alter ego ever intended for his schtick to change SJW beliefs, more like to show the rest of the world how absurd those beliefs are.

            1. There are some that cannot be saved, the only thing you can do with them is use them as an example to those who can be saved from the derp.

    2. The next step is violence. It is on its way.

      Shouting won’t work, so they’re going to switch to bats and 2x4s.

      1. And that is why they hate the 2nd Amendment and want everyone disarmed.

      2. And when that happens groups like YAF should follow my suggestion above: move their meetings off campus, preferably to private property, and start carrying to their meetings. When the SJWs show up with their bats and 2X4’s, pull guns on their asses and see how tough they are then. Also, have them arrested for trespassing and vandalism.

    3. Yeah, you laugh. And they get jobs in government, media and administrative parts of businesses. So when Mx Non-White Non-CS is HR person deciding who gets hired, or minor bureaucrat distributing largess to Worthy Causes, xe will have the last laugh.

      1. They are mostly future government and NGO employees; their rage will only work to the extent that a federal government mandates that they be catered to [Title IX, OCR] which entirely depends upon the administration that is pandering for their votes in the next election. Right now, within mostly public universities, they have a wedge they can use to throw tantrums anywhere they see an opportunity. Outside of that they will all be zeros. And of course it will be someone else’s fault that they cannot find remunerative employment with their ____________ studies degrees.

        1. They are all through the HR departments of private businesses even now. Already we are being bombarded with SJW style diversity and ‘everybody wins’ award systems.

          Don’t think they can’t infect everything.

  5. A pack of wild trigglypuffs has appeared.

      1. It was ineffective but also shrill and annoying.

  6. And please remember, the left thinks all of these folks should go to college on the taxpayer dime. Not only do they us to tolerate this behavior, they want us to pay for the privilege.

  7. How dare you say racist and sexist things you fucking white male!

  8. —–But if Kansas’s campus were to become a safe space?and if the university were to enforce a policy of obligatory emotional comfort in a remotely even-handed way?it’s the liberal students would who feel the brunt of the censorship—–

    You obviously don’t know how this works. Didn’t they teach you anything in commentator college? Only non-progs are subject to rules. Progs are immune.

    1. ah.. oops. even-handed way. yeah, I missed that the first time.

    2. ah.. oops. even-handed way. yeah, I missed that the first time.

      1. The squirrels missed it too. Of course, we all know it won’t be enforced that way.

    3. I was going to say the same thing

      1. No need, Simon said it an extra time just for you.

        1. How thoughtful of him

  9. This has got to be a ploy by YAF to get more and more clips of fucking idiots acting like fucking idiots.

    1. The internets is full of videos of people screaming “I’m an idiot and I can prove it!” at the top of their lungs. YAF is going to have to do better.

    2. Seriously. It’s flypaper for idiots.

    3. Yes. They knew exactly what would happen when they invited aggressive, stupid people with emotional IQs of a toddlers. Get the cameras rolling.

      1. They have the cameras rolling.

        I’m *this* close to believing it was pre-emptive. One video like this and you can have a private fundraising dinner emceed by pretty much anyone short of David Duke without anybody asking any questions.

        Q:”Why didn’t you invite the leftists?”
        A:”Because this *rolls video* is what happens when we invite leftists to an event intended to be a calm discourse.”

        The lefties get their likes on FB, the YAF gets to have Rudy Giuliani or Condoleezza Rice speak freely at whatever function they decide to host.

        1. Except the leftists then turn their shrill lunacy on the school administrators, who obligingly cancel Rudy and Condi’s invitations.

  10. I sort of hate to point this out, but the SJW hamplanet has a point. The Constitution allows slavery, which is profoundly unlibertarian. It is also not really binding to anyone living today from a contract point of view, as Lysander pointed out a loooong time ago.

    1. The Constitution, as it has existed for the past 150 years, does not allow slavery.

      It’s binding from a contract point of view on the government, and that’s all that matters. The Constitution is, of course, not a grant of rights but a limitation on government power.

      1. The Constitution is, of course, not a grant of rights but a limitation on government power.

        Hmm. Tell that to every incarnation of the federal government for at least the last century.

      2. Yeah, the 13th amendment is part of the constitution.

        But, realistically, the constitution is binding on the government in about the same way that gun-free school zones are binding on mass murderers.

        1. But, realistically, the constitution is binding on the government in about the same way that gun-free school zones are binding on mass murderers.

          True, but the same could be said for the ability of all laws, contracts, and customs to bind people. Nothing binds a miscreant except force.

    2. The Constitution allows slavery, which is profoundly unlibertarian.

      Umm, no. It specifically prohibits it, in the 13th Amendment. To the Constitution. Which is part of the Constitution.

      Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

      1. I should have said “as originally written,” which is also what her point was.

        1. Point of Order: Not to get slimy, but “slavery” the word was never in the Constitution, meine gute freunde.

          Contextual slavery sure, e.g. “other persons” and “those subjected to labor” etc., but never the dirty word itself.

        2. I should have said “as originally written,” which is also what her point was.

          Was it? Why did she use the present tense, then?

          A complaint that the Constitution doesn’t allow voting by 18 year olds would have equal validity, which is to say, none at all.

      2. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

        Not to be a pedantic asshole (I’m a cynical asshole, after all, not a pedantic asshole) but technically the 13th does still permit slavery or involuntary servitude as a potential punishment for a crime. It’s never used, unless you count community service as involuntary servitude, but technically the fat cow and Chipper are right in that the Constitution – even with the 13th amendment – does allow slavery under limited, specific circumstances (e.g., as punishment for a crime after a conviction).

        1. Well, we can add in conscription to that list also. And the government explicitly reserves to itself the privilege of starting conscription up again anytime it wants to.

        2. People in prison are given work assignments, even if they don’t want them, so maybe you could say it is used. It was certainly used well into the 20th century, with chain gangs and such, was it not?

    3. “The Constitution allows slavery,”

      I especially love it when people hold up a sign that says “I am willing to be overtly, obviously wrong and destroy and future credibility I wish to have”

      Thankee, sirrah

    4. Why are all of you assuming she has actually read the document?

      1. Or that even if she did, she cares or it matters.

        It’s there in the video; if he wasn’t guilty of using the Constitution to justify the slaves he keeps, he was using it as a foil to continue murdering Indians Native Americans Dependent Domestic Nationals. It doesn’t matter if his mother got off the boat in the 80s and met his father on the Reservation, he’s more guiltier and less victimy than she is.

    5. The Constitution never allowed slavery – and a *precise* reading of it would have seen the institution abolished upon signing – it just never (until the 13th amendment) explicitly forbid it.

      However, the whole ‘human rights are innate to humans’ thing should have shut it right down if, even back then, the Constitution wasn’t treated as a ‘living document’ and a whole lot of definition-twisting being done to keep the slave states invested in the new nation.

      1. However, the whole ‘human rights are innate to humans’ thing should have shut it right down if

        If it actually appeared in the U.S. Constitution. Which it doesn’t. The Declaration of Independence talked about it, and some state constitutions too. But you won’t find it in the U.S. Constitution.

  11. The student is of course welcome to speak as loudly and angrily as she wants?she might even have good reasons to be passionate. As far as I know, YAF invited these students to come, so I would not say that anyone’s free speech rights were violated.

    Two things:

    1. Since this was a private meeting run by a private organization that presumably has floor rules for discussion at meetings, no, she does not have the right, invited or not, to show up and make it impossible to have a discussion. YAF would have been within their rights to demand she either calm down or leave.

    2. Nothing in evidence suggests she has a reason to behave that way. Especially since this is the second time this has apparently happened. Does not sound like she knows how to be civil.

    1. Can they tag her by name in these videos, so that future employers and grad school admissions officers will be able to find these videos when (if) they do background research on her?

      1. Oooohhh. Good one!

        Nothing like past stupidity on video to wreck future job opportunities. These young people do not even think about that do they?

        1. These young people do not even think about that do they?

          As far as I can tell they don’t think about much of anything, ever.

      2. “future employers”

        Ha! No way. On the public teat from cradle to grave.

        1. So… Julia.

      3. You think Starbucks would care about this?

    2. 1) University of Kansas is a public (government-run) university, so not really private. If the club is an “official” campus club then they are not truly private. When I was in college you had to be an official club to be able to use college facilities for free. Those circumstances do muddy the waters a bit, but they were still disruptive assholes.

      2) Oh, I’m sure she has plenty of “reasons,” from her mile-long list of grievances.

    3. “Does not sound like she knows how to be civil”

      She’s almost…. uncivilized?

  12. So, does this mean the PM Links will be late or delayed today?

    1. *appreciative pat-on-the-shoulder*

  13. Yeah, okay.

  14. Invite them again, and two weeks from now have a dance number prepared. If things get outta control again, the YAFers bust out a boombox and start dancing.

    1. and stripping

      1. and YAFing

    2. Uh oh, sounds like someone is gonna get served.

  15. A lot of those lefty’s will vote Republican at least once before they’re 30. I don’t doubt it for a minute.

    They all show up to the YAF because they’re curious. They’ll never admit it, but they don’t feel comfortable with themselves. What they’re doing here is looking for answers (but making themselves look like complete asses in the process).

    I think eventually a lot of them will rebound to some ideology that is less authoritarian. Or not. Who the hell knows?

    1. I hope you are right about that. You might be. What I find with most people I meet that age is not so much that they are ideological but that they really haven’t been taught anything. You can’t overstate how badly our education system has deteriorated over the last 20 or 25 years. I am really not being a “things used to be so much better” old guy here. I am horrified by this. I have no idea what they teach in schools right now but it isn’t anything you or I would recognize as a proper education.

      So mostly what these kids are doing is mouthing buzzwords their teachers have taught them. I don’t think most of them really have any understanding of what they are saying. And that does I think make it likely that their commitment to all of this is pretty shallow and apt to change. God I hope so.

      1. I agree. I have quite a few friends who are school teachers and they almost all have in common a) ultra-liberal, b) assume that all dissenting viewpoints come from a position of stupidity or evil, c) inability to recognize cognitive dissonance in themselves, and d) inability to construct logical arguments in a debate. I try to avoid the subject of education with them, but whenever I hear them speak about politics I just cringe and wonder how many kids they’ve brainwashed into believing their own bullshit. They all bitch about Trump, and post countless memes about some fictitious teacher who told someone off for questioning their politics.

        I firmly believe this is the result of unions controlling the education system and making it impossible in many places for teachers to be fired. I also firmly believe that a school choice program is the only way to get rid of the worst ones and save the ones who can be saved. And of course, it’s just like I praised Hitler if I ever bring up a voucher program with them.

    2. They all show up to the YAF because they’re curious. They’ll never admit it, but they don’t feel comfortable with themselves. What they’re doing here is looking for answers (but making themselves look like complete asses in the process).

      I don’t know that I completely buy it, but I’ve also never had the inclination to go to a statist meeting/rally and disrupt things, so it may be that I just don’t understand them.

    3. No, they show up to confront the devil. It’s reverse cocooning. Without conflict with their supposed enemies whence would they derive meaning?

      These are the real life Tonys. He doesn’t come here to see opposing views; he comes to revel in his (reciprocated) antipathy for those he disagrees with.

      1. Yes, but in Tony’s defense, he has absorbed a small amount of non-retardedness by osmosis. I mean, you think he’s bad, but go on DU or alternet or something. Hell, go on Derpbook.

  16. “You do not get to tell me to calm down!” thundered the second woman. “You do not as a cis white man tell me to calm the fuck down!”

    OK, then get the fuck out and scream out there.

    1. Could he politely suggest she go on a diet? This nation has an obesity crisis.

      1. Michelle Obama approves

  17. Just ignore these people. If they cannot discuss their point civilly then just ignore them.

    Ignoring them is your right, just as is there right to discuss whatever nonsense they want.

  18. But if Kansas’s campus were to become a safe space?and if the university were to enforce a policy of obligatory emotional comfort in a remotely even-handed way?it’s the liberal students would who feel the brunt of the censorship.

    No way. It is perfectly acceptable to excoriate another in the most despicable way possible if you can claim that you were slighted first. Just ask Hihn.

      1. Bully: mid 16th century: probably from Middle Dutch boele ‘lover.’ The original usage was as a term of endearment applied to either sex; later becoming a familiar form of address to a male friend. The current sense dates from the late 17th century.

        Aw, Hihn just secretly loves us all.

        1. True. He did come of age in the late 17th century, after all.

  19. That said, the hypocrisy displayed by the leftists here is remarkable

    No, it isn’t.

  20. Are these kids the first of the bunch to have been raised with participation trophys and not keeping score at games and such idiocy ?

    I like how they have culturally appropriated the finger snapping as clapping of the beatnic culture of yhe late 50s early 60s.

    1. No, that shit started in the 70’s

      This is the first generation to be raised with the internet, rapid media, and 500 channels on TV

  21. ON the one hand it is easy to laugh at these people. On the other hand, I don’t see how creating a generation filled with narcissists who have poor reasoning skills and a persecution complex is going to turn out well for anyone. What are we going to do with these people? At some point life is going to hit them in the face really hard and they clearly lack the maturity or reasoning skills to understand why that happened to them. They are likely going to get more angry and probably violent. Hopefully some of them will grow up but generally hope isn’t much of a plan.

    1. They go to law school at UCLA and focus on Critical Race Theory then they fail the bar a couple of times, clerk for a judge who is a friend of their parents (also judges/lawyers), eventually pass the bar then either continue clerking or become an associate and some social justice oriented law firm in Pasadena.

      1. I see you’ve met some of my classmates.

        1. (not UCLA, but the same thing occurs across the country)

      2. Some of them sure. But not all of these kids come from parents with connections. And I think as the government runs out of money, the social justice racket will likely dry up.

        As an aside, holy shit are social justice attorneys stupid and fanatical. I worked on the defense a class action employment suit against the Secret Service a few years ago. The lawsuit was utterly meritless. The plaintiffs didn’t have a single instance of documented discrimination. Every individual plaintiffs’ story was like some straw man created to discredit the CRA. They were relying on disparate impact but the government had spent 20 years breaking the Secret Service with affirmative action. Minorities and women were grossly over represented in the Service and its leadership. The suit tore the Service apart. It was horrible. The plaintiffs’ attorneys were not even cynical looking to bilk some fees out of the government. They were fucking fanatics convinced the Service was run like the Birmingham Police force in 1965. It is impossible to describe how awful and unreasonable they were.

        1. The plaintiffs’ attorneys were not even cynical looking to bilk some fees out of the government. They were fucking fanatics convinced the Service was run like the Birmingham Police force in 1965. It is impossible to describe how awful and unreasonable they were.

          It’s amazing how many of these types of folks inhabit law. Hell, my school is having an “Intellectual Property and Social Justice” forum in a few weeks. Y’know because women and blacks don’t get enough patents and trademarks because patriarchy.

  22. You cannot argue with social justice warriors, you can’t even discuss with them.

    Yes they claim to want “conversation” but “conversation” to them means that you must first accept as true all of their premises and refrain from ever challenging them in any way shape or form.

    In this case before you can even talk you have to acknowledge that as a white cisgnedered heterosexual you are inherently privileged and therefore required to subjugate yourself to those less priviliged

    1. Yup. After running into them repeatedly online and beating my head against a brick wall trying to talk to them, I finally just decided that as soon as I meet one, once they issue the first personal attack, I quit trying to talk to them like an adult and switch to playing my second favorite online game “Ruin your day” by reducing them to a spitting rage.

      It’s a complete waste of my time and nothing is ever accomplished from it, but it’s so much fun and someday maybe I’ll get one to die of a stroke.

  23. You can’t organize a mob, bang on tables, and scream in people’s faces while simultaneously insisting that everybody’s subjective feelings of discomfort should trump free speech.

    Huh? They’re not saying everybody’s subjective feelings of discomfort should trump free speech, just their’s. What part of “you do not as a cis white man tell me to calm the fuck down!” didn’t you understand?

  24. Those snaps for applause – rofl

  25. The headline “comment” is sexist, racist, and due to the F-word, a violation of Title IX. Send the video to the Title IX enforcement police along with an affidavit that there was no ongoing continual consent to the verbal sex act.

  26. I’m pretty sure if I went to a major university today I would end up expelled. Homey don’t play dat shit.

    1. I’d probably end up in jail. I’d incite one of them to take a swing at me, then beat the crap out of them (I’m 6’5 and was a wrestler in school).

      I did it a couple of times in college in the 80’s when I was bored, but the world is a different place now.

  27. Leftists assholes reveal themselves to be fascist little shitstains. Also, water still wet, sky still blue.

  28. ” …the hypocrisy displayed by the leftists here is remarkable.”

    No, they are not hypocrites within the context of their belief system. They do not claim that everyone is equal and entitled to equal rights; rather, they are consistent in asserting that race, sex, class, and other characteristics are real and defining differences, and that rights and privileges are and should be apportioned according to ones membership in these defining groups. For them to scream, “YOU don’t get to tell ME, but I get to tell YOU” because _________ (fill in race, sex, class, etc.) is in accord with their world view. Not hypocrites; just wrong.

    1. They do not claim that everyone is equal and entitled to equal rights; rather, they are consistent in asserting that race, sex, class, and other characteristics are real and defining differences, and that rights and privileges are and should be apportioned according to ones membership in these defining groups.

      You know who else thought that race and other characteristics were real and defining differences, and that rights and privileges are and should be apportioned according to ones membership in these defining groups?

      1. There’s some famous quote I’m too lazy to look up about revolutionaries always wanting to take the place of the oppressor rather than ending oppression.

    2. Vernon, every hypocrite has a rationalization.

      Doesn’t mean they aren’t hypocrites. Just that they rationalize their way to a double standard.

      1. But they don’t rationalize. They openly admit that their standards are different for different classes of people.

  29. Here’s a gem to go along with this story.

    http://campusreform.org/?ID=8222

  30. Topic related story: Had this happen in the Mission in SF recently. Out one night when a woman starts demanding free drinks because we were “Gentrifying her neighborhood”. Bartender tosses her out, she declares loudly she’s being tossed because she’s a woman of color (white is a color right?). Goes on to scream at everyone that we’re all racist (bar was almost half latino/black at the time) and classist (most everyone there worked in construction or service industry) and she’s going to sue the bar for violating her civil rights. This goes on for 20 minutes or so before the cops come in and arrest her to a standing ovation from the patrons.

    These people are not worth the time, but they can be entertaining in their idiocy.

    1. Zeitgeist?

  31. Just like leftist useful idiots everywhere always. This is what the McCain-Feingold law was all about; shutting up the opposition while reserving the right to make your own case. This is why Clinton has vowed to destroy new organizations she deems have no right to exist. The more you look, the more you find examples of bullying by the left in Venezuela, the USSR, Nazi Germany, the PRC etc etc etc. It never ends with them and their playbook is unchanged. Bullies aren’t interested in taking your guns away from you and making you helpless for your own good. I think Clinton has vowed to do that as well even if she has to ‘take executive action’ in the absence of congressional action.

    Don’t say it cant happen here because it is happening now. Lets see what happens to all of the stupid motherfuckers in the press with TDS if that bitch gets into the oval office.

    I wonder, does Reason have a right to exist?

  32. they are completely reliant upon the protection of the First Amendment, which gives them the right to shout hurtful things at people who disagree with them.

    Protects their right to shout hurtful things, Robby.

  33. The student is of course welcome to speak as loudly and angrily as she wants?she might even have good reasons to be passionate

    There it is.

    That said,

    Because you can’t not say it, Robby.

  34. Breaking news, college students say stupid things.

  35. “You do not get to tell me to calm down!” thundered the second woman. “You do not as a cis white man tell me to calm the fuck down!”

    Actually, that’s not precisely true. As a person with any means of communication whatsoever, he and anyone else gets to tell you anything they want. What you do with it is of course up to you, but if you think that this sort of behavior will get you very far once you’ve left your “safe space”, you’re very much mistaken. In fact, typically, it only gets the shit knocked out of you if you’re lucky.

  36. it would be emotionally satisfying to read about some of these harpies get the same bullying treatment they subject others to

    Emotional satisfaction is overrated. and fleeting.

  37. “You do not get to tell me to calm down!”

    “Calm down? Nah, screech all you want, I’m getting it on camera to send to your parents, you snotty little twat!”

    -jcr

    1. Parents? You mean mother. And she’s probably a piece of work too.

  38. “You do not get to tell me to calm down!” thundered the second woman. “You do not as a cis white man tell me to calm the fuck down!”

    Well she just wasted someone’s (hopefully just her own) money on a college degree, because she’s going to be unemployable.

    1. She can probably get a job at the Grosse Vache Cafe in some college town until a minimum wage hike comes along and she gets replaced by a machine.

      -jcr

  39. The Wildebeast should be expelled.

  40. A lot of the current “social justice” craze is kids who grew up hearing endless treacly propaganda about the great days of protest between about 1965 and 1973 (when the draft ended, and, by an amazing coincidence, the campuses calmed down.) They want to do it too, so they find odder and odder causes to support, and make public fools of themselves.

    Insofar as they interfere with others’ education, they should be thrown off campus and barred from ever re-enrolling anywhere. Let them work for the rest of their lives off-the-books at sub-minimum wage, ruing the day they thought that the Days of Rage had come again.

  41. Just roll her in flour… wait that’s a different joke.

  42. I rather expect this to end in another case of Mizzou Syndrome: Donations way down, applications down even further, and a resultant fiscal crisis. . .

  43. The lack of self awareness almost makes my head explode.

    Didn’t watch the video though; I don’t need that in my life.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.