'Tulane Canceled a Talk by the Author of an Acclaimed Anti-Racism Book After Students Said the Event Was "Violent"
In Life of a Klansman, Edward Ball reckons with a white supremacist ancestor. Try explaining that to the students.
The New York Times hailed it as "a haunting tapestry of interwoven stories that inform us not just about our past but about the resentment-bred demons that are all too present in our society today," and the anti-racism scholar Ibram X. Kendi participated in a virtual discussion about it with Ball. Tulane University was slated to host another such event, featuring Ball and Lydia Pelot-Hobbs, an assistant professor of geography and African American studies.
[...] the university opted to postpone it following blinkered outrage from students who insisted that the event was "not only inappropriate but violent towards the experience of Black people in the Tulane community and our country." Other members of the Tulane community called it "harmful and offensive," and demanded its cancellation. Still others said the university should apologize and take action against whoever approved the event.
[...] a casual observer might wonder whether they mistakenly thought the book was written by a Klansman, or endorsed the Klan. The comments on the event's announcement page—as well as statements by student government officials—make it abundantly clear this is not the case. They know exactly what the book's point of view is.
"The last thing we need to do is allow someone who is even reflecting on the hatred of their ancestors to speak about white supremacy, even if their efforts come from a place of accountability," one student wrote on Instagram.
"There is nothing that a book on white supremacy written by the descendant of a Klansman can do to promote or influence an anti-racism atmosphere," wrote another.
But this wasn't just random students leaving comments; Tulane's student government weighed in as well. In a letter to the administration "on behalf of the entire student body," [...] demanded the event's cancellation. And they did not mince words.
[...] The New Republic---currently one of the woke-est of the progressive magazines---wrote that Ball "builds a psychological portrait of white supremacy, which then radiates outward and across time, to explain the motives and historical background behind racist violence." Yet leaders of Tulane's student body think it is their solemn duty to prevent anyone from learning about this history.
'
https://reason.com/2...tudents-racist/
Study:
'It was not our intention to choose items that most or typical liberal/conservative students at UNC hold, nor
did we attempt to select the most extreme viewpoints in order to manufacture artificial controversy. Rather, we attempted to choose views that are genuinely controversial and that a critical mass of individuals on our campus really do hold. These are views that students will encounter as they navigate their academic and social lives.
[...] interrupting a speaker or blocking entrance to a campus event---have been used by groups around the country, but are generally prohibited by student conduct
codes, including UNC's.
[...] In the Feb. 5 draft of this report, this finding read, "Over 25% of students endorse blocking a speaker they disagree
with." That statement accurately describes the proportion of students who selected "somewhat appropriate," "appropriate," or "entirely appropriate" in response to the "create obstruction" and "form a picket line" items below. However, Table 17 below reports proportions that are calculated in a more restrictive way: only "appropriate" and "entirely appropriate" are coded as endorsement of blocking a speaker
[...]
Students' Responses to Objectionable Political View
Liberal Moderate Conservative
Create an obstruction, such that a campus speaker endorsing this idea could not address an audience.
19.2% 3.3% 3.0%
Form a picket line to block students from entering an event where a speaker will argue for this idea.
18.7% 2.7% 1.0%
Write graffiti on the dorm room of a student who endorses
this idea.
1.5% 1.1% 0.5%
Write graffiti on the office of a faculty member who
endorses this idea.
3.2% 0.0% 1.0%
Yell profanity at a student who endorses this idea as he or
she walks across campus.
3.5% 0.0% 0.5%
Shove a student who endorses this idea when they are
speaking about it outside on campus. 1.5% 0.5% 1.0%'
https://fecdsurveyre...sion-Report.pdf