oh, sure. i think the tools they're using are awful, hence the whole "the bad" bit.
but in everything else i'd read, all i was able to get out of it was, stuff that looked like hypersensitive overreactions to petty slights, and really shitty tools. i thought the new yorker piece at least hinted at some underlying thing i could sympathize with—not just raw identity politics and trying to shut down other voices, but a potential bedrock in "let's broaden the voices represented" and "let's rethink what education should focus on, given more people are going to college than ever before" and whatnot. i think that's a charitable interpretation of their platform, but it's also something that can be worked with that isn't just awfulness. in that way, i actually found the new yorker piece a little hopeful, because it suggests maybe you can satisfy these nobler goals without ceding freedom of speech on campus.
it is entirely possible i am too much of an optimist! but i'd like to think it's possible the uglier aspects of this movement may fade away. the linked tumblr post also pointed out that institutions have a lot of power in this game, if they choose to exercise it—students tend to leave campus after four years, and the university can just wait them out without ceding to any of their awfuller demands.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2016-06-01 12:53 am (UTC)but in everything else i'd read, all i was able to get out of it was, stuff that looked like hypersensitive overreactions to petty slights, and really shitty tools. i thought the new yorker piece at least hinted at some underlying thing i could sympathize with—not just raw identity politics and trying to shut down other voices, but a potential bedrock in "let's broaden the voices represented" and "let's rethink what education should focus on, given more people are going to college than ever before" and whatnot. i think that's a charitable interpretation of their platform, but it's also something that can be worked with that isn't just awfulness. in that way, i actually found the new yorker piece a little hopeful, because it suggests maybe you can satisfy these nobler goals without ceding freedom of speech on campus.
it is entirely possible i am too much of an optimist! but i'd like to think it's possible the uglier aspects of this movement may fade away. the linked tumblr post also pointed out that institutions have a lot of power in this game, if they choose to exercise it—students tend to leave campus after four years, and the university can just wait them out without ceding to any of their awfuller demands.