The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Emerson College Suspends Student Group for Distributing "China Kinda Sus" Stickers
Criticism of a foreign country (or at least this foreign country) is now apparently forbidden by Emerson.
The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) has the details:
Emerson College suspended a campus chapter of conservative student group Turning Point USA on Oct. 1 after members passed out stickers critical of China's government. Today, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education is demanding the private institution drop its investigation against the students and reaffirm its promises of free expression.
On Sept. 29, several TPUSA members passed out stickers featuring a hammer and sickle with the caption "CHINA KINDA SUS" — slang for "suspicious."
The next day, Emerson's International Student Affairs team sent out a statement to the college's international students decrying the "stickers that expressed anti-China hate." Emerson Interim President William Gilligan sent a separate email to the student body in which he promised that "the College will initiate an investigation."
Under pressure from other student groups who accused TPUSA of anti-Asian bias and xenophobia, including the Emerson Chinese Student Association, the college launched an investigation into the group. In an Instagram video, the TPUSA chapter said the stickers are critical of the Chinese government, not the Chinese people.
On Oct. 1, the TPUSA chapter's leaders received a letter from Julie Rothhaar-Sanders, Emerson's director of community standards, stating that the college had launched a formal investigation of TPUSA under Emerson's Bias-Related Behavior and Invasion of Privacy policies. While the investigation is active, TPUSA faces "interim action," meaning the group is barred from normal activities, such as hosting events or reserving campus space for meetings.
"If anything is 'kinda sus,' it's Emerson's overblown response to the stickers," said FIRE attorney Adam Steinbaugh, who wrote today's letter to Emerson. "This investigation will cause students and faculty to suspect that their rights mean nothing to the college. Emerson must make this right by immediately dropping the investigation and affirming that criticism of a foreign government is not discriminatory harassment."
FIRE's letter reminds the college — whose motto is "Expression Necessary to Evolution" — that "freedom of expression entails the right to criticize not only our own governments, but those of foreign nations, even when that criticism is offensive."
While Emerson is a private institution not bound by the First Amendment, it must honor its Statement on Freedom of Expression, which touts "the high importance" of the First Amendment on campus and "encourages students to present ideas, express their individuality and culture, and be open to thoughts or life styles [sic] that differ from their own."
As FIRE's letter explains, this sticker was critical of China's government, not its people, but would be protected even if it had been [critical of Chinese people generally]:
The stickers do not invoke or traffic in stereotypes associated with people of Chinese descent or origin. Instead, the stickers are speech critical of China's government. The stickers utilize the familiar emblem of the sole governing party of the country, superimposed over a video game character bearing the same red color of China's flag. The sticker's text ("China kinda sus") refers to the name of the country, not its people. Criticism of a foreign government is not inherently criticism of the people it purports to represent, even if people who hail from, descend from, or support that particular nation find that criticism personally offensive.
[E]ven assuming the stickers' message was capable of being construed as speech based on race, ethnicity, or national origin, it does not rise to the level of peer-on-peer harassment as properly defined under the law.
This isn't the first time a student has come under fire because of speech criticizing China's government. Fordham University student Austin Tong sued his college after he was banned from campus and placed on probation for a June 2020 Instagram post memorializing the Tiananmen Square massacre. Similarly, University of San Diego School of Law professor Tom Smith was investigated for criticizing the Chinese government in a personal blog post in March. Almost two months and multiple letters from FIRE later, USD ended the investigation, deeming that Smith's post was protected speech.
For more on attempts to suppress criticism of foreign countries, see my post from 2018, Department of Education Decision May Pressure Universities to Restrict Some Anti-Israel Speech.
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. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Criticism of a foreign country (or at least this foreign country) is now apparently forbidden by Emerson.
Professor, have you not heard of the legal principle regula aurea? Also known as the Golden Rule -- He Who Has The Gold, Rules.
China has the gold. It rules.
These scumbags administrators are servants of the Chinese Commie Party. Emerson should lose its tax exemption. Its endowment should be seized, because it is a traitor organization. Then, pull its accreditation. Zero tolerance for woke, and for service to the Chinese Commie Party.
All these administrators should be visited in their offices, and get their ass beat. Then parade them wearing tall dunce caps through the campus. To deter.
I am curious whether you have a macro that you use to post this in each and every thread on the VC, or whether your insanity extends so far that you actually retype it each time.
"These scumbags administrators are servants of the Chinese Commie Party"
Statistically speaking, it's far more likely that you, an Internet rando, are a servant of the Chinese Commie Party.
Follow the money.
As a donor to Emerson's radio station who just received a fundraising letter I am in a position to... probably not influence them because there weren't enough digits in my past donations.
I'm not holding my breath for AG Garland to write a letter to the FBI directing them to investigate cases where students like these feel threatened, intimated or harassed over their speech.
Why would he do that? Why would you want him to?
"Why would he do that?"
Exactly. These students generally aren't part of Biden's political base, and are unlikely to be donors.
Why would he do that even if they were? And do you want him to do that?
Well, when those nasty evil American parents questioned why the schools they were sending their kids to said that their kids were racist just because they were white....
Garland said "Looks like the FBI should take a look at those parents".
I mean, we certain support using the FBI to do what the poor understaffed local police can't do and protect our sacred school boards from the evil terrorist hordes.
So certainly we also support using the FBI to do what the poor understaffed university police can't do and protect our sacred students against the evil terrorist hordes.
I don't want him to do it. He shouldn't have done it.
Bingo
Yes, if you assume there is no violence at school board meetings, doing anything to address violence at school board meetings sure does look silly!
But even then, not so silly that you can't stay on topic.
"Yes, if you assume there is no violence at school board meetings..."
You and the National Association of School Boards have had several opportunities to present evidence of an uptick in violence remotely severe enough to justify federal intervention, and been unable to do so.
The letter asking the FBI to treat protesting parents as domestic terrorists was unable to give any examples beyond minor scuffling, and characterized protected speech as threats.
"Speech is violence" is what the idiotic left has been indoctrinated with. If you can ignore logic and reason and pretend that ridiculous statement is true, then the rest of their actions start to make sense.
That's not what the letter said, that's not what the AG is asking the FBI to do, you are just denying reality and replacing with your own version.
The letter said:
"As these acts of malice, violence, and threats against public school officials have increased, the classification of these heinous actions could be the equivalent to a form of domestic terrorism and hate crimes..."
Given that the Association was unable to provide any actual examples of "heinous action" and instead gave some examples of minor scuffles and other examples of people engaging in protected speech, the most reasonable inference is that they are doing this to chill protected speech.
"Given that the Association was unable to provide any actual examples of 'heinous action' and instead gave some examples of minor scuffles"
Today's "minor scuffles" are tomorrow's "unchecked burning and looting" when partisans spread the stories.
"You and the National Association of School Boards have had several opportunities to present evidence of an uptick in violence remotely severe enough to justify federal intervention, and been unable to do so."
By which you mean, "unable to do so in a way that would convince a devoted partisan".
Have you never heard of "broken window" policing? You guys were advocating for it back when it meant that police would be rigid and inflexible in dealing with communities other than your own. Coincidentally (I'm sure), this approach was supported when it was suggested that it be used in poor, black neighborhoods. You catch a poor, black kid throwing rocks at the windows of an abandoned building, you gotta shoot him now before he moves on to shooting cops in the streets.
At a guess, I think Michael was hoping to see some intellectual fairness and consistency with his recent decision to direct the FBI to investigate cases of school board members feeling threatened or intimidated by what is very clearly protected protected speech.
Of course, better would be for Garland to retract his unconstitutional letter about school board protests and try to rein in rather than instigate further abuses of the FBI - but if we can't have that, we can at least expose his rampant hypocrisy.
"Of course, better would be for"
Of course, still better than that would be if people didn't get angry enough to threaten violence against people who are just trying to keep the schools open without kids getting sick, but that's obviously unreasonable.
I wonder what motivates them to censor. Is it fear? Are they personally offended by different points of view? Are they merely reactionary -- whatever they say, we say the opposite, just because? Is censorship a performance metric sonehow?
Truly, it is mystifying.
People in key positions are getting regular checks from China, would be my guess.
How do you explain those who censor to appease right-wing Israeli belligerence?
I was just going to ask what it means for Israel's critics if criticizing a country is now the same as fomenting hate against that country's people
Totally not the same thing, because...reasons.
"Totally not the same thing, because…reasons."
Yeah. Go with that one. No way anybody can poke holes in your logic if you go with that defense.
Is objecting to Israel's immoral, right-wing military belligerence in the occupied territory (and superstition-soaked, bigoted domestic laws and conduct) (1) criticizing a country, (2) fomenting hate against that country's people, (3) both, or (4) neither?
How does expression or conduct involving Israel differ from expression or conduct involving China in this regard?
Well, China has bought off Biden and his son, while Israel hasn't. So Israel needs to be investigated, while China is ignored.
"while Israel hasn’t"
Do you have evidence for the assertion Biden and his son are not among the people Israel has bought off?
What colors are you lads in the KKK wearing these days?
Just as a stopped clock is right twice a day, so the Rev. is correct here. Criticism of the policies of the government of a foreign country, whether it's Red China or Israel, is not the same thing as animus toward the ethnic group which populates that country. If I accuse either the Chinese government or the Israeli government of genocide, the proper response should be to question whether my accusation is justified, not to yell "racist!" or "anti-Semite!"
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Waste of brain cells warning
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Kookland is performing his weird trick of "footnoting" his assertions with a music video. I didn't follow it, but hovering over it shows "youtube". So there's no need to click on it.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Maybe not money directly, but maybe there's an an expectation that the institution will defend those who are funding them. Hm.
We could put that to the test. Print up some "Planned Parenthood Kinda Sus" stickers and pass them around, see what happens. Prolly get arrested...
Hmm, I don't think it's going to work out like you think but you should still try!
To keep the theming of weak jokes using videogame memes, maybe you need to put "pro-lifers" into a game of Fortnite, dancing on the prone bodies of Texas pro-choicers.
If you said this thing about support for Israel, it would be considered anti-Semitic.
Why isn't the simpler explanation that Emerson College has a bunch of young communists and Chinese students, and wants to pander to them more than to the minority of conservative students, because the former have numbers? It's like y'all never went to college.
Is Hunter Biden getting million dollar diamonds from Israelis?
Sorry....$80,000 diamonds...
Probably not. Are you?
So if Hunter weren't getting bribes from China, this *would* be racist?
What, pray tell, would China bribe Hunter Biden to do (or not do)?
No, this isn't bribery from China, you paranoiac.
It's because Asian students are complaining a lot these days. Not jus Chinese - because they all look alike to certain folks.
Nothing that isn't speech (and thus protected either by Constitution or norm), but between Covid and research security, it's just kinda crappy.
Your fantasies about China taking the trouble to bribe some random college are not helping
"Nothing that isn’t speech (and thus protected either by Constitution or norm), but between Covid and research security, it’s just kinda crappy."
I don't know how many commenters have lived outside the US, but it turns out that foreigners often have strong opinions about the United States as well. Being confronted with external opinions about one's country can feel "crappy" but that's part of life abroad.
Pure whattaboutism.
A newly hostile environment making certain students feel unwelcome is not something to ignore, even if that happens overseas. And even if it's protected speech.
Beyond the general issue with not endorsing immiseration, it's messing with the global competition for the best talent.
"Pure whattaboutism."
I don't think you understand what whattaboutism is, Sarcastro. I was drawing personal experience to be able to relate to an analogous situation.
"A newly hostile environment making certain students feel unwelcome is not something to ignore, even if that happens overseas."
It happens everywhere. Sometimes students' views about the US make American students feel unwelcome. Sometimes students' views about abortion make pro-life students feel unwelcome. That's part of life.
I don’t think you understand what whattaboutism is"
You responded to a claim of we (Americans) shouldn't be lashing out at non-Americans for being non-American by counterclaiming, "yeah, but in their countries, they do it to us".
And you don't think the other guy knows what "whataboutism" is.
Is it fear? Are they personally offended by different points of view? Are they merely reactionary — whatever they say, we say the opposite, just because? Is censorship a performance metric sonehow?
Yes.
Do they have a job of keeping a school running with a whole bunch of different interest groups in it? Yes? So when one of the interest groups is stirring up trouble against another one of the interest groups, the choices more or less boil down to "tell the group stirring the trouble to knock it off" and "support the right of people to go around pissing other people off", a right whieh is often supported more by the "wants to piss people off" community than by the "look, I just wanna go to class, man" community.
The enemy of my enemy is my friend, and since they only see the local enemy (anyone to their right), the distant enemy of their enemy is their friend.
DaveM, might it be reasonable to suppose that there could be Chinese nationals among Emerson's non-resident alien students—comprising more than 10% of its student body? If so, might there be reasonable concern among the school's administration that right wingers with stickers to put on display all over the campus are not actually super-concerned foreign policy wonks with a peculiarly specific focus, but instead are trying to send a message to the Chinese nationals that they are unwelcome on campus? Or, alternatively, that those right wingers are just getting out their stickers to own the libs, making an unwelcome attack on Chinese nationals on campus mere collateral damage?
I know the OP made a point to acknowledge that the stickers are not protected speech on campus, but it also made it a point to slide by that, and argue the stickers really ought to be protected. Maybe you did not notice the first part. Maybe a university administration with Chinese nationals to accommodate prioritizes that mission ahead of encouraging unprotected speech uttered for the purpose of owning the libs. If so, that, at least, would not be mystifying.
No. There would not be such reasonable concern. This has been yet another episode of Simple Answers to Stupid Questions.
"No. There would not be such reasonable concern. This has been yet another episode of Simple Answers to Stupid Questions."
Reads more like simple answers for simple people, or stupid answers for stupid people.
The correct answer is "yes, there might be some reasonable concern. But not enough to justify the actions taken."
Why would criticism of China constitute "owning the libs"?
Asians are among the "others" -- those who are not White, male, Christian, heterosexual, and 'traditional' -- regarding whom tolerance is something for which conservatives fault liberals.
(This one is for Green Day fans not familiar with The Coverups.)
Ah, Kirkland thinks it's wrong to hate on some designated "other."
Asians are among the “others” — those who are not White, male, Christian, heterosexual, and ‘traditional’ — regarding whom tolerance is something for which conservatives fault liberals.
Sure. Which is why conservatives are fighting the Fairfax County School Board to keep the race-neutral process by which students are chosen for Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology, and under which 70% of the student body is Asian.
"Why would criticism of China constitute “owning the libs”?"
Because the people doing the criticizing are prone to self-delusion, and think anything they do constitutes "owning the libs".
To the questions in your first paragraph:
1. Yes, there almost certainly are Chinese nationals in the student body.
2. No, that concern is not reasonable.
Alternative 2. Theoretically possible but almost certainly not the case here.
The original post very carefully did not say that the speech was protected by the First Amendment (because private institution) but explicitly did say that the speech was protected by the institution's own published policies. Amending those policies is within the institution's discretion. Simply ignoring them is not.
Not only might there be some actual Chinese nationals, there might be some Americans descended from former Chinese nationals who are tired of being blamed categorically for things that happen in China over which they have approximately zero control.
From my experience with Chinese nationals they don't care about Among Us and wouldn't know the slang "sus" unless they were very westernized, but then they would understand it's about the government. Many of them would agree.
My experience with American nationals is that they don't care about "Among us", either.
You appear to have a very low opinion of the skin thickness of the approximately 250 Chinese national students at Emerson College. Would you feel intimidated or unwelcome if you were at a foreign university that posted the same image about America?
Depends. Is anyone randomly attacking Americans for being American in the streets? If that were happening, I might get a bit agitated if someone's putting "Americans are sus" messages around my environment.
Who "acknowledged" this? If by "OP" you mean, strangely, FIRE, they said the opposite, and I don't see how that forthright assertion can be properly characterized as "sliding by" anything.
Nor do I see why encouraging Emerson to eschew the tuition paid by (presumably junior) members of the totalitarian Chinese government's nomenklatura is not an "idea" protected by Emerson's a Statement on Freedom of Expression. Who says "right wing" students have to be "welcoming" of the presence of such?
"Who “acknowledged” this? If by “OP” you mean, strangely, FIRE"
"OP" means "original poster", so no, I doubt FIRE was intended.
I said "strangely", for exactly that reason. Reason's crappy comment software makes the comment tree hard to discern, and my question about “Who 'acknowledged' this?" remains unanswered.
"my question about 'Who Acknowledged this?' remains unanswered."
To someone who can't read, such as yourself, that might be true. On the other hand, you yourself quoted the answer upthread. For your convenience the answer was "I know the OP made a point to acknowledge". From which, the answer to your question "who acknowledged"? is "OP acknowledged, and your proposed answer "FIRE acknowledged" is just wrong.
Interesting question. Well, my first reaction would be that if our choices are between not "owning" some group vs censoring free speech, then obviously we must choose the latter. In the first place, I'm not even sure one could ever rigorously define what it means to "own" a group. But even more importantly, clear free speech is a more foundational civic exercise. So foundational, in fact, that our entire US federal government, as powerful as it is, is explicitly forbidden from prohibiting it.
*not censoring free speech.
"They don't speak for us" is not censorchip.
"I wonder what motivates them…"
It’s an opportunity to side against Americans.
You're jealous, because you thought your guys had a monopoly on that?
There may be a real cause for concern, buried deep down here somewhere, about higher education's reliance on foreign nationals paying sticker price and propping up campuses within the territory of repressive governments. Those financial ties could find expression in administration policy towards criticism of China, Saudi Arabia, Israel, and other similar countries.
I'm not sure that's what's going on here, though I am pretty certain it had nothing to do with TPUSA's provocations. I don't think TPUSA was doing anything besides reheating the cold war rhetoric it's inherited from its geriatric founders and sponsors as part of the broader culture war Charlie Kirk has found so profitable to pursue.
"There may be a real cause for concern, buried deep down here somewhere, about higher education’s reliance on foreign nationals paying sticker price"
\
In a modern research university, education is a side business.
Simple really.
Any speech which is defined as racist, bigoted, or homophobic, automatically must be censored otherwise someone in power would have to explain why the speech isn't what is accused to be and in turn find themselves be accused of the same offense.
We have effectively turned social media into a US wide heckler's veto.
"I wonder what motivates them to censor."
If you have a job to do, and people insist on getting in your way, you're going to find that frustrating. That can lead to people doing things they really shouldn't have done, and probably wouldn't have done absent provocation. Like when the timber workers get frustrated with the ecoterrorists blocking access to their job site, and decide to resolve the problem by driving over them. Your typical timber worker is not a homicidal lunatic... under normal conditions.
How much money does the school get directly or indirectly from the Chinese Government?
Not as much as Walmart gets. (indirectly as subsidized manufacturing of consumer products).
So any _______ Kinds Sus is xenophobic now?
Remind me who the racists are again? I wonder who exactly gets to determine the domain of "Asian-identified" students at Emerson. Alright...rhetorical question. Some rich old white woman who knows 'em when she sees 'em.
"Remind me who the racists are again?"
Category 1 racists, are the people who treat every person of a specific race as having traits other than the objectively observable ones.
Not racist:
black people sure have dark skin, don't they?
black people have a higher statistical chance of suffering from sickle-cell anemia.
Racist:
Them black people surely do love playin' basketball, amirite?
Those Chinese sure are devious people! They attacked the United States by releasing a bioweapon in Wuhan.
Side characteristic: Most racists tend to be not very intelligent. Correlation, not causation (probably)
Category 2 racists are the ones who look for excuses to use racist language or repeat baseless racist stereotypes.
Emerson is not living up to its creed and this is censorious thuggery.
That being said, I wouldn’t be too concerned if I were the students in question. If they can tough it out for a few years they’ll have a nice judicial clerkship lined up. I mean if TPUSA itselfnfiring someone for saying “ I HATE BLACK PEOPLE. Like fuck them all . . . I hate blacks. End of story.” is good enough to get you onto the 11th Circuit with a feeder judge four short years later; saying “China kinda Sus” shouldn’t be a barrier to career advancement in the conservative legal community at all.
I'm not associated with this TPUSA organization and I'm concerned that they said they hate black people. (Incidentally, do you have a link?)
Story on Clanton's texts
https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/a-conservative-nonprofit-that-seeks-to-transform-college-campuses-faces-allegations-of-racial-bias-and-illegal-campaign-activity
https://abovethelaw.com/2021/10/law-school-student-famous-for-saying-i-hate-black-people-now-has-prestigious-federal-clerkship/
Report of her getting the Pryor clerkship
That's not very nice of her.
Since she might be litigious, let me add a disclaimer: "if the allegations are true."
Judge Pryor seems to disagree with your assessment. Maybe the ASSLaw pedigree was trump in his judgment.
I'm thinking of adding Crystal Clanton to the "future of conservative legal thought" list.
I'm also trying to figure
what must be occurring in Ginni Thomas' head when she hires and works with an overt racist.
It's always possible to reform and become a distinguished law professor.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernardine_Dohrn
Also
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/from-bank-robber-to-law-professor-a-story-of-redemption
Some of Dohrn's conduct was wrong, even criminal. She pled guilty and was jailed.
Crystal Clanton says he can't remember whether she wrote that she hated all Black people and repeatedly made racist comments. Are you expecting her to demonstrate some newfound character, renounce her right-wing bigotry, and accept responsibility -- rather than continue to ride her Federalist Society street cred to coveted positions on the public payroll arranged by fellow clingers?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Waste of brain cells warning
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Kookland is performing his weird trick of "footnoting" with a music video. I didn't follow it, but hovering over it shows "youtube". So there's no need to click on it.
And then there's the "Some of Dohrn’s conduct was wrong, [maybe] even criminal" bit. Ya think?
That exhausts his bag of tricks. No use in saying "Roll over, boy!" That's beyond his abilities.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Waste of brain cells warning
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
So, we're clear that TPUSA never said it hates black people?
"I mean if TPUSA itselfnfiring someone for saying ' I HATE BLACK PEOPLE...'" was, of course, a bit obscure as to its meaning.
~"I hate white people" was no barrier to Sarah Jeong staying on the NYT editorial board, so there's that. (She was later kicked off or left for saying the NYT should be boycotted, iirc, but the old ~"I hate white people" tweets weren't a problem.)
Yes. My point was that a a high level officer of TPUSA said something much worse than these students, never totally denied it or apologized and was nonetheless handsomely rewarded in life. So don’t fret about being canceled for anything. There’s a federal clerkship at the end of the line.
Believe you and not my lying eyes, eh?
Your lying eyes showed that you can literally say: “I HATE BLACK PEOPLE. Like fuck them all . . . I hate blacks. End of story.” And still get to be a clerk on a federal circuit court for a SCOTUS shortlisted/feeder judge a few years later.
Will Justice Thomas say something publicly about the kind of person Judge Pryor and Mrs. Thomas seem eager to hire?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Waste of brain cells warning
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Kookland is performing his weird trick of "footnoting" his assertions with a music video. I didn't follow it, but hovering over it shows "youtube". So there's no need to click on it.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
My lying eyes also tell me that you can be cancelled, more or less effectively, for a lot less or nothing objectionable at all. E.g., EV has a whole series on academics being cancelled for employing the word "nigger" is entirely proper ways. And I've pointed elsewhere in this thread to Jason Richwine. Etc., etc. So your claim is bullshit.
As to Ms. Clanton, I've never heard of her, but in the N.Yorker story above she says, “I have no recollection of these messages and they do not reflect what I believe or who I am and the same was true when I was a teenager.” If she actually did send such a tweet I won't defend the sentiment (it seems a stupid thing to think -- blacks are on average even more of a PITA than whites, but not by any means all of them are that), but neither will I get too excited over an offhand private communication where I do not know the context.
" where I do not know the context "
I would love to hear the context that could change anyone's mind about that comment.
Prof. Volokh and his conservative fans love your use of the vile racial slur.
"employing the word “nigger” is entirely proper ways."
Assuming, arguendo, that this isn't a null set.
It is of course not a null set, as I've just supplied an example of using "nigger" appropriately, and now have done it again.
You're assuming your willingness to use the word implies that you have a good reason for using it, and that is a non-sequitur.
My point was...
...a lame attempt at garden-variety partisan hackery.
...and that's your turf, exclusively.
I will add that I reject the locution "much worse than these students" since the students in fact did nothing wrong. Indeed, what they did was mildly commendable, particularly in comparison with the crap we see so much of from alleged students.
They did their part in the Great Ideological Battle, capturing Hearts and Minds to the side of all that is free and good and defeating the evil Chinese Communist Party almost single-handedly.
Obviously if they'd accomplished that I wouldn't have used the word "mildly". Your reading skills are operating at their usual level, I see.
Obviously, if you had two working neurons to rub together you 'd have realized you were wrong and withdrawn gracefully. But, yes, my reading skills are working better than yours, again, still. Do come back if you'd like some more well-deserved mockery.
Oh and I meant if TPUSA itself is firing the person in question it’s clearly beyond the pale. And yet, she was rewarded.
Not a safe conclusion. See Jason Richwine. Is TPUSA less cuckish than the Heritage Foundation? I'm not prepared to assume that.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/a-talk-with-jason-richwine-i-do-not-apologize-for-any-of-my-work
"I mean if TPUSA itselfnfiring someone for saying “ I HATE BLACK PEOPLE. Like fuck them all . . . I hate blacks. End of story."
And saying similar things about white people gets you a gig on the NYT editorial board. Which is as it should be, we all say things that tick people off occasionally.
It's NOT as it should be. Sarah Jeong's offensive effluvia was part of a repeated, public, pattern, not remotely "occasional", and the NYT absolutely deserved the opprobrium it got for hiring her. The unrelated embarrassment they later suffered from that decision was karmatic, if insufficient.
I don't love this nonsequator, but your rejoinder of whattaboutism is some lame crap.
If you want to see lame crap just read your own posts.
Why bother, when you'll follow up with even lamer crap?
I don't think USD Law should have tried to investigate Prof. Tom Smith, but I do think that what Prof. Smith said about the Wuhan lab leak possibility
“If you believe that the coronavirus did not escape from the lab in Wuhan, you have to at least consider that you are an idiot who is swallowing whole a lot of Chinese cock swaddle.”
is quite offensive for reasons having nothing to do with China and everything to do with swallowing 'cock swaddle.' Although his employer shouldn't be investigating him, Prof. Smith is a boor.
The University of San Diego certainly seems to be filled with prudes who are concerned...deeply concerned...with offensive language.
Maybe that's why they teach classes in "Explorations in Human Sexuality," "sexualities," and "sexuality and borders."
https://www.sandiego.edu/cas/gender/curriculum/#
Presumably, they assume that people who sign up to take a class titled "Explorations in Human Sexuality" won't be offended by discussion of sex.
I don't think "cock swaddle" has anything to do with penises, if that's your concern. I struggle to think of what a "cock swaddle" would actually be. I think it's supposed to be "cockswattle," pertaining to the wattle of a rooster. For comparison, "twattle" is also a term for "nonsense."
I think it’s supposed to be “cockswattle,”
That seems to be a good bet given the numerous results (mostly from the UK) and it's apparent meaning that result from a Google search of that term.
You're free to swaddle your swattle any way you find comfortable.
is quite offensive for reasons having nothing to do with China and everything to do with swallowing ‘cock swaddle.’
Tell us what you rushed to assume is the meaning of that expression.
It's a lame joke based on a dated popculture reference. You know, Conservative.
China Kinda Sus
Forbidden
US Horrible Racist Slave State Let's Overturn Constitution Without So Much As A By Your Leave
Ok, for now. Soon, mandated. China's official statements align.
Area poster passionate defender of what he thinks the Constitution says.
For perspective, look up TPUSA and enjoy their T-Shirt designs. I especially like the one with Lady Liberty holding aloft a Glock instead of her torch. This is a group which seems on a mission to disseminate RWCC (Right Wing Campus Crap)—which is to say provocations tailored to target and offend some people, own the libs, and hide behind 1A protections which, at least in the case of Emerson, do not even apply.
Turning Point is a bunch of asshats, but it's hard to see how this is a "provocation" or "tailored to target and offend" anyone. Other than tankies (and people who try to uphold standards of the English language), "China kinda sus" should be a pretty universally held belief in this country and the rest of the free world.
Hmmm, the sticker isn't doing as well in my home with my Chinese girlfriend, granted, she's got no involvement with the nat'l party, but still!!
But still what?
It doesn't say "Chinese girlfriend suspicious".
Australia just agreed to buy some US nuclear submarines because "China sus", and I can't see how they're wrong.
I'm pointing out that unless you are some form of illiterate moron, it's really possible to take either way. Thanks for sharing your perspective.
IPLawyer: It's hard for me to see how "China kinda sus," with a picture of the Chinese Communist Party emblem, could itself be taken as an insult against people of Chinese ethnicity. On the other hand, I can certainly see how some Chinese citizens may feel some affection for their government, warts and all, and might bristle at criticisms of that government. Is your sense of your girlfriend's reaction the former (it is itself an insult of people of Chinese ethnicty) or the latter?
This blog's chronic treatment of issues involving criticism of Israel's conduct (rather than Israelis) make this comment hilarious.
What treatment? You've made several comments about Israel's conduct on without being accused of being anti-Semitic.
IIRC it was your desire to deport the Jews to Texas that earned you that title, Arthur.
You are lying about me. Mostly because you are a worthless conservative racist and a disaffected loser in modern America.
Right. It's a lie that Kirkland wanted to deport Jews to Texas. It was Texas (west Texas specifically, I believe), or West Virginia that he wanted to deport Jews to.
You are lying, too, you bigoted clinger. I have never proposed deportation of anyone. I proposed offering citizenship to Israelis.
The right-wing, faux libertarian, bigoted misfits this White, male blog (intentionally) attracts are an especially disingenuous, deplorable lot. No wonder decent, mainstream Americans have rejected them and their ugly, stale thinking. The culture war is not over but it has been settled. All that is left is better Americans’ mocking of clingers and the conservative losers’ limp whining about it.
Some specific about "[t]his blog’s [apparently allegedly objectionable] chronic treatment of issues involving criticism of Israel’s conduct (rather than Israelis)" might be more persuasive than another evidence-free allegation supported by a music video. Your act is always this sort of thing, and tiresome beyond words.
Assuming he's provided a link to the music video I suspect (Springsteen and "Born in the USA"), it's a sign that people don't always take the intended message from a particular message. If you need proof, look at how many Republicans keep trying to play a protest song at their rallies.
If he picked a different song, maybe give it a listen and see if it does actually have relevance to what you (or he) are saying. Or, continue proudly in ignorance, (I obviously can't criticize that what with being unwilling to scroll up and find the link to play it.)
I'm happily unaware of most of the content pointed at inKook's attempts to mislead me and others into thinking he has anything to say when he turns one of his assertions or insults into a link. He tricked me a few times into wasting time and brain cells before I decided to attach warning labels and derision to instances of his weird and dishonest trick.
If he describes what he's linking to I don't attach the label. Still don't bother to look, however. No reason to.
"I’m happily unaware of most"
You could have stopped there.
Eugene, this might be a defensible thing to say within the narrow confines of actual litigation and legal analysis, where the only question is a specific utterance and an official response thereto.
But it is an utterly bizarre thing to say, if one assumes that you have some basic awareness of the events of the past couple of years. Asian Americans have been complaining about an increased amount of racial harassment and attacks over the past couple of years, which they attribute to (among other things) the emergence of COVID and Trump's previous attempts to pin the blame for the pandemic and/or its severity on the Chinese government.
TPUSA's "criticism of the Chinese government" (*rolls eyes*) is occurring against that cultural background, and it is clear that they intend to link up to that stewing animosity, which helps to draw attention to their juvenile provocations and their "cause," such as it is.
You can pedantically re-assert that that's not what the sticker says, and I will agree that, viewed in isolation, the sticker itself does not say anything about the coronavirus or say anything specific about why China is "kinda sus." I understand that well enough, and that's a perfectly fine thing to say (again) if we're just thinking with our lawyer-hats on. But there's no reason that we (without our lawyer-hats) need to engage in that kind of narrow thinking and reasoning. Reasonable observers can understand what's going on here, even if no judge can properly take judicial notice of it.
"Trump’s previous attempts to pin the blame for the pandemic and/or its severity on the Chinese government"
And today we know for a fact that the Beijing government (see, I avoided the C-word) has nothing to do with the virus, and has no share of the blame?
Today, the American Republican party has taken up the mantle of helping the coronavirus spread as far and as fast as possible, as a form of protest against the fact that they lost the last Presidential election.
You are a liar and a loon.
"You are a liar and a loon."
You misspelled "absolutely correct".
Just because you, SimonP, are too stupid to separate criticism of China qua CCP from purportedly "anti-Asian" Covid sentiment (scare quotes because most of it is as overblown as this sticker) doesn't mean that everyone is.
Hell, most Asians outside of China (and probably inside) hate China. "China Kinda Sus" should be the default filter through which any discussions of China are viewed. (Note, China does not equal Chinese people. I've yet to meet a Chinese person that didn't seem like a nice person.)
It may be "clear" to you, but it isn't clear to those of us who have been suspicious of the Chincom government since long before the "increased amount of racial harassment and attacks over the past couple of years." (And, BTW, if you look at what kinds of people are engaging in actual racial attacks on Asian people in this country--well, let's just say they aren't typical Trump voters.)
So, if you have a complaint for the Chinese Communist Party, say, right from the beginning, that that's who you're complaining about. Or, just do what Donald Trump does, and whine a lot about Jina. He can't even bring himself to say the word.
It's not "the Chinese people" that the hammer-and-sickle refers to, but apparently you're not up to figuring that out.
Tell me more how irrational it is to infer that they meant to attack "China" when they chose to refer to "China", as opposed to anyone or anything else..
Your implication that no one can "sus" that the ChiComs' Wuhan lab was the origin for the SARS-2 outbreak lest Asians be attacked is lunacy that even Facebook and Twitter have abandoned.
"Your implication that no one can “sus” that the ChiComs’ Wuhan lab was the origin for the SARS-2 outbreak lest Asians be attacked is lunacy"
Compared to the lunacy that your inferrals are the responsibility of anyone who is not you.
" can certainly see how some Chinese citizens may feel some affection for their government,"
Or at least feel some need to simulate such affection, so long as they have relatives back home, or might not be able to avoid returning at some point. Totalitarian states are like that, after all.
"It’s hard for me to see how “China kinda sus,” with a picture of the Chinese Communist Party emblem, could itself be taken as an insult against people of Chinese ethnicity"
Then again, you're on record as defending the right to use racial slurs directly.
Then, again, it's hard to see that your dubiously vague claim in any way refutes the observation you quote.
That things are hard for you to do does not imply that they are difficult for people of normal intelligence.
Actually only an illiterate moron would think "China sus" could reasonably be interpreted as "Chinese people suck". But thanks for sharing your perspective.
Only a Conservative can think that referring to "China" obviously implies only criticism of Chinese Communist Party, while criticizing "Israel" implies rank anti-semitism.
Are you talking about me? Saying what, when, and where?
There is indeed a name for people who randomly drag the Jews into a discussion of any subject.
I should say "compulsively". It's not random.
"Are you talking about me?"
Did I say I was? No, Mr. Egomaniac, not everything is about you.
"There is indeed a name for people who randomly drag the Jews into a discussion of any subject."
Like you're trying to do? Point to the word "Jews" in anything I wrote before this.
"Australia just agreed to buy some US nuclear submarines because “China sus”, and I can’t see how they’re wrong."
France can, seeing as how Australia had previously contracted to buy French-made submarines, and now will pay for none of them.
If these were corporations instead of countries, there'd be a tort case in there.
AU has and will pay a lot of Australian dollars to the Nuclear Group(FR). There's some good videos about this subject on the YouTube channel Sub Brief, including from well before the decision to buy American nuclear subs. Try to educate yourself before opening your blab to say stupid and ignorant things. Just for once.
So, I should have educated myself so that I would understand that Australia will be paying France for the nuclear subs it's getting from the US and UK? Before saying crazy things like France is mad at us for blowing up their deal with the Aussies? That's your working theory?
And? So you don't like them. Well too bad for you.
Bloodiest regime on earth, and then there's social credit scores. Too bad for us. (Btw, "Us" excludes you, Comrade.)
Glad to see that you've done your part to oppose them.
Got a full plate opposing the would-be totalitarians like you, but how big has your part been, Comrade?
Someone has to keep the Internet working, comrade dimwit.
Some people think it is morally important to speak in ways that castigate the Chinese government for its conduct, even if doing so offends that government, or even some Chinese people.
But NToJ, no sensible person thinks the right way to honor that moral imperative is with anti-China stickers plastered around the Emerson College campus—where the only other people who will take note or give a damn, one way or the other, will be the Chinese nationals among the students. This is Right Wing Campus Crap. There is no point in pretending it has any better purpose than to be gratuitously offensive, and then to trumpet pretend, "Gotchas," if the university administration responds.
But Lathrop, no intelligent person thinks this is offensive to anyone, let alone gratuitously such. If Emerson College is admitting people who are supporters of the Chinese government — something you have presented zero evidence for — then that is what is gratuitously offensive.
This would be true, if their original stickers were careful to complain about Chinese government, specifically, instead of China, generally.
Are you unfamiliar with how the English language works?
Yes, I am. Were you not able to operate the words I wrote?
He was unable to comprehend that you are so stupid as to think that stickers displaying the hammer and sickle and referring to China rather than the Chinese were not being "careful to complain about Chinese government, specifically, instead of China, generally".
The words "hammer" and "sickle" do not appear on these stickers, but the word "China" does. Helpful to have facts like these on hand when you want to lecture someone about using language.
SL views China like he views publishing. More authoritarianism is always better.
Yeah. The guy who puts "USMC" into his screen persona is anti-authoritarian. Sure. That sounds legit.
As if the USMC has never been deployed against authoritarians.
Their authoritarian structure comes in handy when you need someone to hop off the boats and go sop up all the bullets and find all the landmines.
Emerson is a private school, so it could just add a paragraph to its student handbook (and faculty handbook as well) that free speech is protected unless it creates a clear and present danger...to income from domestic or foreign sources.
Was it Oral Roberts U. that found out that Pell grants and such did after all come with strings attached?
Who, whom.
It tolls for thee.
And now for you. Karma is a bitch.
Are you laboring under the misconception that you are clever? I'd like to disabuse you of that notion. But, telling you straight up about facts you don't want to hear seems unlikely to have any result.
This feels like a repeat. Wasn't there something similar involving flyers earlier this year or last year?
TPUSA is clearly losing the culture war if they think Among Us is still very relevant to college students.
I'm not getting the reference. Searching turns up a game by that name, but where did TPUSA mention it?
The graphic (which is from the game) and slang "sus" have currency because the game was popular last year. Could have been the year before even, I've been busy.
Ah, OK. Thanks.
Never heard of it, but I gather it's not my kind of game.
It was popular with young people. Popularity peaked a couple of years after the game came out.
Among Us is an online game where multiple people compete on two teams. One team are the “Crewmates,” who are charged with performing various tasks around a closed environment. If they complete their tasks, they win. The other team are the “impostors,” who have special abilities, including the ability to kill the Crewmates. They are charged with stopping the Crewmates. The two teams are visually indistinguishable. Only the individual players know which side they’re on, at the start of each round.
The Crewmates have various defensive mechanisms against the Impostors, including most importantly the ability to kick out a player - ejecting them from the environment and “killing” them. The ejection decision is made by plurality vote, whenever one is called. Each vote typically is preceded by debate, where the players try to convince each other of who the Impostor(s) are.
This is where “kinda sus” comes from. Given that the debate is performed via text, the extremely brief abbreviation of “sus” became useful for mobile players. It became a popular meme and gag, for a flash of a moment, to accuse “red” (the Crewmates each were identified by color) of being “sus,” regardless of the evidence.
Ironically for TPUSA, accusing other players of being “sus” came to be a way of marking oneself as being suspicious, as Impostor players experimented with various ways to fool the Crewmates into ejecting one of their own. So TPUSA’s stickers, in addition to being way late to the campus discussion, have an additional irony, coming as they do from an astroturfed organization designed for the sole purpose of encouraging hormonal and intellectually immature students to give in to their baser instincts. TPUSA is kinda sus, indeed.
The old right-wing bigots who are fans of this clinger blog are going to support the fledgling conservative bigots of Turning Point no matter what.
Thanks for the explanation, but I'm not seeing anti-communist stickers as an example of "giv[ing] in to their baser instincts." As compared to campaigning for Klein to lose his job at UCLA for being insufficiently kids-glove towards a student being a jackass. Or the clowns at Evergreen who got the Weinsteins deplatformed.
Anti-communist stickers? Did they forget to get out their "Commies kinda Sus" stickers?
Proving that leftists will always side against Americans any time there's a non-American side.
I guess you guys shouldn't have let the liberal-libertarian mainstream stomp you into irrelevance in the culture war. All you guys have left is the whining and attempted ankle-biting.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Waste of brain cells warning
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
For any one reading the above, Kookland is performing his weird trick of "footnoting" his assertions with a music video. I didn't follow it, but hovering over it shows "youtube". So there's no need to click on it.
And then there's his tiresomely triumphal crystal ball.
That exhausts his bag of tricks. No use in saying "Roll over, boy!" That's beyond his abilities.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
""^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Waste of brain cells warning
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^""
You don't have to put this in. Your name already appears at the top of your comment.
As does your name at the top of yours. If that's ironic when I do it, consider what it must say about you when you allege that.
I hear a buzzing, like an insistent fly just positive that THIS time, the window will be open air instead of glass, when crashing face-first into it.
Nope.
But your post if proof you like to wrap you facts-independent partisan hatred in the American flag.
It’s an extremely clear pattern of behavior. Whenever there are two sides and Americans are on one, leftists take the other.
Feel free to rebut with counter examples, if you can think of any. I doubt you will be able to.
Once in a while leftists will find a way to side against Americans without explicitly endorsing the other side. But that’s still siding against Americans.
Extremely clear.
"Feel free to rebut with counter examples"
As if you'd care.
As if you could.
Make you care about actual evidence?
I do not claim to have that kind of ability.
"Proving that leftists will always side against Americans any time there’s a non-American side."
Yeah. They're the ones who go around muttering about "Real America"
And are you saying they've joined you on the virus' side of Americans v. coronavirus?
I'm on the side of America vs the COVID totalitarians.
You and virus are besties, then?
We'll see how long that lasts if the USA winds up in a shooting war with China.
"We’ll see how long that lasts if the USA winds up in a shooting war with China."
Technically, we've been in one since 1950. Never get involved in a land war in Asia.
Would love to see this come to trial. First item on discovery demand: all financial ties between Emerson and CCP funded organizations.
All you need to make this pay off is jurisdiction over the CCP. Which court are you expecting to file in?
Jurisdiction over Emerson should suffice.
"Jurisdiction over Emerson should suffice."
That's a hell of a "long arm" law, if it works. Good luck with that.
Eugene, the guest spot you offered to FIRE has convinced me that I cannot trust them to make any argument in good faith, or to be fair and equitable in their choice of plaintiffs. I now expect that they choose plaintiffs in order to wage the fight for the "academic freedom" of only certain speakers, as a front in a broader conservative culture war.
So I'm not going to bother reading the actual argument you've posted here. Assuming that's what it is.
So I’m not going to bother reading the actual argument you’ve posted here
Of course not. Why would you suddenly shift gears now and start commenting based on knowing what you're babbling about?
Golly gosh gee whiz, mister, I ain’t never seen y’all around here much before, how’s you know anything about what I know or don’t know, huh?
You're dealing with someone who just KNOWS things, and there's no arguing with things he JUST KNOWS.
Golly gosh gee whiz, mister, I ain’t never seen y’all around here much before, how’s you know anything about what I know or don’t know, huh?
Both your ignorance-based posting history and...
"So I’m not going to bother reading the actual argument you’ve posted here."
...are pretty big clues...not that either you or Pollock have even a single one of those.
Your problem is the assumption that God has chosen to reveal truth directly into your brain, with no need for things like logic or deduction.
A few years ago they defended the rights of someone who had gotten in trouble for taunting a student in TPUSA, so no, it's not just certain speakers.
“A few years ago.”
Sure, I once believed that they were committed to academic freedom. But the polemic we saw here disabused me of that notion. They’re not headed in the right direction.
Any resemblance between FIRE and you is entirely coincidental.
Here is what you've said about killing people with whom you disagree:
You'll forgive me if I don't give a shit about whether you think I argue in good faith.
I don't know if you argue in good faith or bad, but I do know that you seem to have trouble rubbing 2 brain cells together to come up with even halfway decent arguments.
His 2 of a kind beat your 1.
I didn't remotely imply that I give a shit about what you give a shit about, so no question about whether I should forgive you even arises.
"I didn’t remotely imply that I give a shit about what you give a shit about"
Who cares?
I do wonder if say it was Israel or hell Ireland or Italy? Well I'd bet Ireland or Italy would be fine to dis...and we all know why
Because the Elders of Italy and the Elders of Ireland are not running the school but the Elders of Zion are?
I wouldn't piss off the Elders of Italy, capiche?
And the Elders of Ireland are mean drunks. Best not to offend them, either.
As for the Elders of Zion, give them some respect - they have a mean, green, Rothschild Weather Machine.
Don't forget our space laser!
"As for the Elders of Zion, give them some respect"
Why? They couldn't even keep the machines out without Neo's help.
Never saw any of the movies, but it's news to me that the Elders of Zion run the Matrix. Are you sure that that you think so is not the product of them living rent-free in your brain, or at least in the cavern where your brain ought to be?
Watch the movies before you embarrass yourself (further), by commenting about what is in or not in the movies.
Hint: Zion is the name of the city (outside the Matrix) where the free humans live.
The most important question is: where can i get one of those stickers? Those are awesome.
You can make your own. There's nothing particularly complicated about sticker-making.
China’s efforts to “reeducate” its Moslem minority involve mass concentration camps on a scale that is clearly ethnic cleansing and pretty close to genocide.
Imagine if an American institution like Emerson College prohibited any criticism of the Nazi regime on grounds that such criticism is…racist.
After all, the Nazi regime considered itself the embodiment of the German Volk, so that any opponent of the party was necessarily an enemy of Germans as a people and ethnic group.
Conflating the two, as Emerson College has done here, lay at the core of its ideology.
" In an Instagram video, the TPUSA chapter said the stickers are critical of the Chinese government, not the Chinese people."
So the lesson appears to be that if your student group wants to be critical of a foreign government, they should be careful to say so from the beginning
So the lesson appears to be that if your student group wants to be critical of a foreign government, they should be careful to say so from the beginning
Reasonably intelligent people do not in general anticipate having to explain to morons like you that which is already clear to begin with.
Also, the Spanish Inquisition. No one expects that.
What do they normally assume about dealing with morons like you?
They did.
Poorly.
^
China is the country (and its government), not the people.
China is whatever people associate with China.
The sticker shows a hammer and sickle.
News to you that that is not a universal birthmark among the Han?
It also shows text using the Roman alphabet. Are you aware that this is not the script of the Chinese people?
And later developments give the lie to the obviously absurd claim that this was about people of Chinese ethnicity or nationality at Emerson and instead was about protecting the college's relationship with the Chinese government:
https://twitter.com/sarahemclaugh/status/1446219361132351493
"And later developments give the lie to the obviously absurd claim that this was about people of Chinese ethnicity or nationality at Emerson and instead was about protecting the college’s relationship with the Chinese government"
If true, it's their relationship to protect.