| ... |
... |
@@ -1,0
+1,22 @@ |
|
1 |
+====Discourse as a fuel for change is a neoliberal myth – it obscures the historical need for direct action.==== |
|
2 |
+Andrew **Tillett-Saks,** 20**13** |
|
3 |
+Tillett-Saks is a labor organizer and critical activist author for Truth-Out and Counterpunch. "Neoliberal Myths" Counterpunch. http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/11/07/neoliberal-myths/ |
|
4 |
+In the wake of the Brown University shout-down of Ray Kelly, champion |
|
5 |
+AND |
|
6 |
+greater freedom. To the contrary, direct action has always proved necessary. |
|
7 |
+ |
|
8 |
+ |
|
9 |
+====Absolute free speech comes at the cost of excluding marginalized groups on campuses – making tradeoffs with free speech is crucial to ensure the inclusion of minority students.==== |
|
10 |
+Reed E. **McConnell,** 20**12** |
|
11 |
+"Why Harvard's Hate Speech Policies Are Necessary" http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2012/4/18/hate-speech-libertarians/ |
|
12 |
+There certainly should be dialogue around issues of racism, sexism, homophobia, and |
|
13 |
+AND |
|
14 |
+well thought-out and fair—and certainly not worthy of protest. |
|
15 |
+ |
|
16 |
+ |
|
17 |
+====Idealistic understandings of deliberative democracy are incoherent and inherently paradoxical. Democracy mandates exclusion through formulating consensus that makes true free speech impossible and recreates arbitrary structures of power. ==== |
|
18 |
+Chantal **Mouffe,** 19**97** |
|
19 |
+"Carl Schmitt and the Paradox of Liberal Democracy" |
|
20 |
+Let us examine this model of deliberative democracy closely. In their attempt to ground |
|
21 |
+AND |
|
22 |
+people by reducing it to one of its many possible forms of identification. |