# Univeristy of Wisconsin System: Disruptively Protest 3 Times, Get Expelled **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 10, 2017, 7:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/univeristy-of-wisconsin-system-disruptively-protest-3-times-get-expelled/798446 "2017-10-10T07:42:53Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2017, 7:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/univeristy-of-wisconsin-system-disruptively-protest-3-times-get-expelled/798446/61 "2017-10-11T07:55:47Z")
> [@Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](#): > > Until then, any racists the college Republicans invite to UW campuses will hopefully be unable to be heard over the disruptive noise of the students. This deplorable attitude is exactly why this policy is necessary. I hope the first few disruptors get expelled promptly, and any that would follow in their footsteps are sufficiently cowed that this attitude that you and **BigT** hold fades away ignominiously. ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2017, 8:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/univeristy-of-wisconsin-system-disruptively-protest-3-times-get-expelled/798446/62 "2017-10-11T08:37:23Z")
> [@Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](#): > > Until then, any racists the college Republicans invite to UW campuses will hopefully be unable to be heard over the disruptive noise of the students. Do we want this to be set as a norm? That is, do we want it to be a norm that protesters can shut down invited speakers? How does this play out? Well, if right-wingers decide that they’re sick of having their invited speakers shut down, they can band together and protest any left-wing invited speakers they don’t like. At which point nobody can invite a speaker, and no speaker worth their salt would be dumb enough to accept an invite, because all it means is that some band of rowdy assholes are going to shut them down - violence may or may not become an issue, but either way there’s going to be mostly heat and very little light. Should it be the norm that invited speakers essentially go away? We could try de-escalating via non-legal means, but at this point they’re deplatforming the fuckin’ ACLU, so I doubt that’s going to get very far. And you don’t seem to want that either. ---
**Author:** ![dba\_Fred](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c37758/32.png) [@dba\_Fred](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dba_Fred)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2017, 9:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/univeristy-of-wisconsin-system-disruptively-protest-3-times-get-expelled/798446/63 "2017-10-11T09:38:05Z")
nm ---
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2017, 12:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/univeristy-of-wisconsin-system-disruptively-protest-3-times-get-expelled/798446/64 "2017-10-11T12:34:09Z")
If you believe that using airhorns at a speech and blocking access to a speech is okay…you don’t believe in “free speech”. You believe in mob rule and “might makes right”. You know who else believed in that? (Hint it was those guy’s a while back with the really snazzy outfits). ---
**Author:** ![Urbanredneck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ea5d25/32.png) [@Urbanredneck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Urbanredneck)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2017, 12:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/univeristy-of-wisconsin-system-disruptively-protest-3-times-get-expelled/798446/65 "2017-10-11T12:51:07Z")
> [@kenobi\_65](#): > > Campus buildings are, by and large, public spaces. At least at the time that I attended the UW (and I have to believe that it’s still the case today), there was no requirement to present a current student ID to enter a campus building (dormitories might be different). > > And, most of those protests, IIRC, weren’t even inside of buildings, but out on the sidewalks in front of those buildings. I can see that. BUT, the right to be there means you abide by rules and I see no problem with the college telling certain people they must leave or say requiring student ID before going into certain areas. ---
**Author:** ![Urbanredneck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ea5d25/32.png) [@Urbanredneck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Urbanredneck)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2017, 1:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/univeristy-of-wisconsin-system-disruptively-protest-3-times-get-expelled/798446/66 "2017-10-11T13:02:28Z")
> [@Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](#): > > It seems too vague to me. The rule defines what cannot be done without specifics on what types of behavior represents actions that are in violation of the rule. The University of Wisconsin isn’t the arbiter of what is a violation of the law. The policy needs to be tested in court. Well it might have been a rule but maybe the rule was not clearly defined. Take for example a rule in a college stating that students were not allowed to record in the classrooms. Yes, its a rule. But not always enforced. THEN a situation comes along where a student records a teacher doing something crazy. Does the school then have the right to discipline that student for recording? [This happened in a college in California.](http://www.ocregister.com/2017/02/13/can-students-record-a-teacher-as-a-study-tool-or-to-ward-off-politics/) So the way I see it is the school has made the rule, posted the rule, so now their is NO QUESTION of what will happen if the rule is violated. So the next time a speaker comes the school can remind students of the rule and if the students violate it, then that is their problem to deal with. ---
**Author:** ![Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/aca169/32.png) [@Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inbred_Mm_domesticus)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2017, 1:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/univeristy-of-wisconsin-system-disruptively-protest-3-times-get-expelled/798446/67 "2017-10-11T13:26:48Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > Are you familiar with [“time, place, and manner” restrictions](http://www.firstamendmentschools.org/freedoms/faq.aspx?id=12993)? If not, I’d invite you to add the few paragraphs I linked to here to your reading on the subject. They’re the reason you can be barred from protesting on the freeway, or train tracks, or the airport tarmac, or boisterously in the auditorium when Ben Shapiro has been invited to speak, or by blaring your message from loudspeakers in a residential neighborhood at 3:00 am. And the fact that you would want to do those things non-violently is no protection at all. Time, place, and manner restrictions on First Amendment activities, such as protesting, are perfectly constitutional. > > ETA: We’ve already established that Wisconsin indeed already has a disorderly conduct statute on the books. What I don’t understand why you think this is some sort of barrier or detriment to the UW policy. Sure, I can buy the time, place and manner restriction argument even though your link refers to public grade schools. Regulating student’s ability to protest based on some of their disruptive behavior probably fits with it. But this means we have Wisconsin laws that punish disruptive behavior, and we have the judgement of the courts this behavior can be restricted by law, so why the new rules adopted by the board of regents and the law Republicans seek to pass? All the law that is necessary to restrict or punish the behavior of these students exists. Yet here we are: 1. Creating new punishments for behaving disruptively, 2. Creating an avenue for restricting protestors’ speech that is vague enough to include things such as students sitting silently with their backs turned, or sitting in a row with shirts that spell out “Fuck You”. Or maybe even wearing uniforms that signal their protest. What is disruptive? It will be defined in the coming months but its crafted entirely by Republicans. The rule should be tested. 3. Destroying a student’s early college years and saddling them with debt without educational benefit because they used a blow horn a couple of times to drown out an invited speaker. That’s pretty harsh. Does that match the punishment for behaving disruptive in public? 4. Colleges are the judge and jury of these students. There is much that is new here even though we agree their is already plenty of law covering the issue. It’s good to see if it will stand up in the courts. > [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > This deplorable attitude is exactly why this policy is necessary. I hope the first few disruptors get expelled promptly, and any that would follow in their footsteps are sufficiently cowed that this attitude that you and **BigT** hold fades away ignominiously. See? Your goal is to use the law like a hammer to attack something you simply don’t like. My goal is for the students to set challenges to the law, learn from their experience, be treated fairly, and use their rights to make it as difficult as possible for racists to speak. Nothing is lost by closing down public debate over “genetic inferiority of people” or “whether there really is global warming”. > [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > Do we want this to be set as a norm? Do I want students to challenge the law to enhance our own understanding of it? Of course I want that to be the norm. ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2017, 1:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/univeristy-of-wisconsin-system-disruptively-protest-3-times-get-expelled/798446/68 "2017-10-11T13:36:30Z")
Before: > [@Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](#): > > Until then, any racists the college Republicans invite to UW campuses will hopefully be unable to be heard over the disruptive noise of the students. After: > [@Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](#): > > Do I want students to challenge the law to enhance our own understanding of it? Of course I want that to be the norm. This is a totally different statement that has exactly fuck-all to do with what I asked you about. [C’mon man](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9nskY722pc). ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2017, 1:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/univeristy-of-wisconsin-system-disruptively-protest-3-times-get-expelled/798446/69 "2017-10-11T13:43:02Z")
> [@Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](#): > > Nothing is lost by closing down public debate over “genetic inferiority of people” or “whether there really is global warming”. The University of Wisconsin and I disagree with you on this point. I’ll add that it doesn’t matter to me what the content of the speech being shouted down is, these acts designed to prevent public discussion of any topic are despicable, and it’s particularly tragic that this type of behavior is most prevalent at universities today. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2017, 2:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/univeristy-of-wisconsin-system-disruptively-protest-3-times-get-expelled/798446/70 "2017-10-11T14:33:19Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > This deplorable attitude is exactly why this policy is necessary. I hope the first few disruptors get expelled promptly, and any that would follow in their footsteps are sufficiently cowed that this attitude that you and **BigT** hold fades away ignominiously. So, you wish for them to go above and beyond the policy, and expel first time offenders? > [@Urbanredneck](#): > > I can see that. BUT, the right to be there means you abide by rules and I see no problem with the college telling certain people they must leave or say requiring student ID before going into certain areas. It’s a public place. Anyone can be there. There are problems with telling the public that they cannot go into public places. > [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > The University of Wisconsin and I disagree with you on this point. I’ll add that it doesn’t matter to me what the content of the speech being shouted down is, these acts designed to prevent public discussion of any topic are despicable, and it’s particularly tragic that this type of behavior is most prevalent at universities today. It is tragic that it is prevalent at universities that speakers are coming to talk about the genetic inferiority of races and anti-climate change speakers spouting absolute nonsense in a setting that is supposed to be for learning. Is it disruptive that white supremacist spencer [isn’t being allowed to talk at UC](https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/higher-education/white-nationalist-asks-to-speak-at-another-ohio-university/2017/09/29/097cdf0c-a514-11e7-b573-8ec86cdfe1ed_story.html?utm_term=.0728bc41ed94)? Does it matter at all that no student or faculty invited him, and the UC GOP specifically has said that [they don’t want him](http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/2017/09/29/uc-college-republicans-white-nationalist-richard-spencer-dont-come/716741001/)? Anyway, my main concern with this law is that word in the law “disorderly”. That’s pretty vague. Is it disorderly to attend a speech and refuse to face the speaker? Is it disorderly to be outside the building the speaker is to attend, not being loud or blocking entrances, but just quietly wearing t-shirts that protest the speaker? What if the t-shirts have profanity? That seems it would be afoul of the “obscenity” clause. What if one person yells out (not over a megaphone, and not drawing anything out) “Fuck You!”? That would also be crossing the obscenity line. If one person is standing several feet in front of the door, and refuses to move (when those who wish to get by can easily get around) is that disorderly? Given that the term “disorderly” is pretty vague means that it is up for interpretation. And it being up for interpretation means that it will likely not be enforced equally, and will definitely not be perceived as being enforced equally. Sure, physically assaulting people is disruptive, as is assaulting property, and deliberately blocking passages. Bullhorns and cowbells, or actual yelling while inside of a venue I also disapprove of, and would not mind seeing curtailed. But I do fear this bill goes further than that, and will have a chilling effect on the freedom of expression of the students. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2017, 3:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/univeristy-of-wisconsin-system-disruptively-protest-3-times-get-expelled/798446/71 "2017-10-11T15:06:55Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > So, you wish for them to go above and beyond the policy, and expel first time offenders? No, I want to see them vigorously enforce the policy and suspend then expel the first few _repeat_ offenders. Apologies that I didn’t make that clear in my original post. > [@k9bfriender](#): > > Anyway, my main concern with this law is that word in the law “disorderly”. That’s pretty vague. Is it disorderly to attend a speech and refuse to face the speaker? Is it disorderly to be outside the building the speaker is to attend, not being loud or blocking entrances, but just quietly wearing t-shirts that protest the speaker? What if the t-shirts have profanity? That seems it would be afoul of the “obscenity” clause. What if one person yells out (not over a megaphone, and not drawing anything out) “Fuck You!”? That would also be crossing the obscenity line. If one person is standing several feet in front of the door, and refuses to move (when those who wish to get by can easily get around) is that disorderly? > > Given that the term “disorderly” is pretty vague means that it is up for interpretation. And it being up for interpretation means that it will likely not be enforced equally, and will definitely not be perceived as being enforced equally. > > Sure, physically assaulting people is disruptive, as is assaulting property, and deliberately blocking passages. Bullhorns and cowbells, or actual yelling while inside of a venue I also disapprove of, and would not mind seeing curtailed. But I do fear this bill goes further than that, and will have a chilling effect on the freedom of expression of the students. My concern is actually quite the opposite. I’m worried the university will be too timid in enforcing the policy. ---
**Author:** ![gytalf2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/ac91a4/32.png) [@gytalf2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gytalf2000)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2017, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/univeristy-of-wisconsin-system-disruptively-protest-3-times-get-expelled/798446/72 "2017-10-11T15:10:07Z")
> [@Jackmannii](#): > > My ideal policy would involve requiring student disrupters/harassers of speakers to first complete a course (with credit, in addition to their usual course load) on the history of free speech and the First Amendment, with attention to all the groups who’ve suffered from having their speech curtailed (including antiwar protesters, civil rights groups, unions and so on). > > Then, depending on the severity of the next violation, suspend or expel them. Physically harming or threatening speakers with violence should be grounds for expulsion on the first occasion. I like your idea! ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2017, 4:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/univeristy-of-wisconsin-system-disruptively-protest-3-times-get-expelled/798446/73 "2017-10-11T16:06:04Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > No, I want to see them vigorously enforce the policy and suspend then expel the first few _repeat_ offenders. Apologies that I didn’t make that clear in my original post. Cool, that’s what I was thinking you meant, but I wasn’t sure if you were looking for them to actually single out some people to set an example and send a message with a bit of harsher punishment than is called for int he law. That is a tendency for many controlling organizations to assert their power. > [@](#): > > My concern is actually quite the opposite. I’m worried the university will be too timid in enforcing the policy. If my understanding is correct, the university would not be the one making the decision, the police and those deciding who to charge for being “disruptive” would be. Then the university would just be following the policy of punishing them for being charged. Though, this bothers me. > [@](#): > > “Perhaps the most important thing we can do as a university is to teach students how to engage and listen to those with whom they differ,” Wisconsin System President Ray Cross told the regents, Do we really need to teach students how to engage and listen to hate speech? Should a minority student be taught how to engage and listen to r. spencer, the white supremacist? Respect that people are going to have hateful ideals and will express them in public, sure we can tolerate that, but “teaching” students to engage and listen to such hateful rhetoric that serves no purpose but to foment hate and violence, I don’t think so. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2017, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/univeristy-of-wisconsin-system-disruptively-protest-3-times-get-expelled/798446/74 "2017-10-11T16:11:26Z")
> [@Jackmannii](#): > > My ideal policy would involve requiring student disrupters/harassers of speakers to first complete a course (with credit, in addition to their usual course load) on the history of free speech and the First Amendment, with attention to all the groups who’ve suffered from having their speech curtailed (including antiwar protesters, civil rights groups, unions and so on). > > Then, depending on the severity of the next violation, suspend or expel them. Physically harming or threatening speakers with violence should be grounds for expulsion on the first occasion. Very bad idea. If they went to study free speech and the first amendment, and all the groups that have had their speech curtailed, they would see that those groups were told that they were being disruptive and shut down on that basis by policies implemented by govts and institutions, not by other protesters. So, that would be a bad example, and would actually cause them to feel that they have empathy with these other groups that were threatened by the system in the past. ---
**Author:** ![Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/aca169/32.png) [@Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inbred_Mm_domesticus)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2017, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/univeristy-of-wisconsin-system-disruptively-protest-3-times-get-expelled/798446/75 "2017-10-11T17:33:56Z")
> [@Urbanredneck](#): > > Well it might have been a rule but maybe the rule was not clearly defined. > > Take for example a rule in a college stating that students were not allowed to record in the classrooms. Yes, its a rule. But not always enforced. THEN a situation comes along where a student records a teacher doing something crazy. Does the school then have the right to discipline that student for recording? > > [This happened in a college in California.](http://www.ocregister.com/2017/02/13/can-students-record-a-teacher-as-a-study-tool-or-to-ward-off-politics/) > > So the way I see it is the school has made the rule, posted the rule, so now their is NO QUESTION of what will happen if the rule is violated. So the next time a speaker comes the school can remind students of the rule and if the students violate it, then that is their problem to deal with. But this rule has little ambiguity and what are the consequences of violating the rule? Certainly not expulsion. Further, the legal basis for this rule is under challenge. So your link supports my argument (not the stuff where I say things like “Shut down the pig racist speakers college Republicans love so much”, but the legal stuff and interesting 1st amendment question I see buried within the partisan sniping). > [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > C’mon man. Would I like to see left- and right-wing speakers shut down by partisan students as a norm? In all honesty, no, but I am willing to tolerate it because I believe this behavior has a rightful place in our public discourse. At the very least, it needs to be addressed what can be tolerated given our Constitution and what cannot. > [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > The University of Wisconsin and I disagree with you on this point. I’ll add that it doesn’t matter to me what the content of the speech being shouted down is, these acts designed to prevent public discussion of any topic are despicable, and it’s particularly tragic that this type of behavior is most prevalent at universities today. First, there is no public discussion at these speaking events. They’re speeches followed by a short round of questions and answers. Second, this isn’t tragic. Take it down a notch. It’s tragic that journalists in Turkey are regularly imprisoned on completely fake charges due to their exercise of what we would consider the 1st Amendment; it’s not tragic when some washed-up bigot Republican gets his speech interrupted. It’s at most obnoxious. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2017, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/univeristy-of-wisconsin-system-disruptively-protest-3-times-get-expelled/798446/76 "2017-10-11T18:33:14Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > Do we really need to teach students how to engage and listen to hate speech? Apparently we do. Also, we need to teach students what kind of speech can be shut down (direct and imminent threats), and what kinds cannot be shut down. Also, how not to label “speech I don’t like” as “hate speech”, because that is lazy thinking. > [@](#): > > Should a minority student be taught how to engage and listen to r. spencer, the white supremacist? Yes. He or she can also be taught that, if he or she doesn’t want to listen, he or she doesn’t have to, but must allow others to listen if they want to. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2017, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/univeristy-of-wisconsin-system-disruptively-protest-3-times-get-expelled/798446/77 "2017-10-11T19:00:34Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Apparently we do. Also, we need to teach students what kind of speech can be shut down (direct and imminent threats), and what kinds cannot be shut down. Also, how not to label “speech I don’t like” as “hate speech”, because that is lazy thinking. > Yes. He or she can also be taught that, if he or she doesn’t want to listen, he or she doesn’t have to, but must allow others to listen if they want to. > > Regards, > Shodan So, you consider r spencer to just have views that I don’t like. Well, that is true, I do not like his views. But, going through what he has said, defnding it as not hate speech is a streecth. I really don’t like quoting such language, but IO’ll give you a couple, and let me know if these are ideas that you agree with and would like to see pushed in the public sphere. > [@white supremicist spencer](#): > > This country does belong to white people, culturally, politically, socially, everything. We defined what America is. > > I oppose the immigration of an African who waits his turn and genuinely ‘wants to be an American’; conversely, I would gladly accept thousands of ‘Swedish boat people’ who wash up on the shores.” > > The ideal I advocate is the creation of a White Ethno-State on the North American continent. > > We must give up the false dreams of equality and democracy > > America was, until this last generation, a white country designed for ourselves and our posterity. It is our creation, it is our inheritance, and it belongs to us. > > We don’t exploit other groups, we don’t gain anything from their presence. They need us, and not the other way around." > > For us, it is conquer or die. This is a unique burden for the white man, that our fate is entirely in our hands. Okay, that was more than I wanted to quote, but I was having trouble deciding between which ones were the most hateful. This is the type of person you think should be engaged and listened to? How do you even do that? I suppose we all need a lesson in that sort of thing. Okay, since you think that we should all know how to engage and learn from hate speech, lets say someone comes up to you, and says that you don’t deserve to live, that you shouldn’t be here, that you should at best be relocated to another country, that you are inferior in every way, that this country does not belong to you. What did you learn? What is your response? ---
**Author:** ![Urbanredneck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ea5d25/32.png) [@Urbanredneck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Urbanredneck)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2017, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/univeristy-of-wisconsin-system-disruptively-protest-3-times-get-expelled/798446/78 "2017-10-11T19:32:38Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > Do we really need to teach students how to engage and listen to hate speech? Should a minority student be taught how to engage and listen to r. spencer, the white supremacist? > > Respect that people are going to have hateful ideals and will express them in public, sure we can tolerate that, but “teaching” students to engage and listen to such hateful rhetoric that serves no purpose but to foment hate and violence, I don’t think so. Yes, I think we can “teach” students how to deal with speech they hate. You see to me the problem is not the SPEAKER but the AUDIENCE which whom they are trying to persuade. So I say, go listen, write down what they say and when question time comes, really hit them with a zinger which makes them look like a fool. Throw their words back on them. Disprove any facts with facts of your own. If all else, hold a counter-demonstration with opposite speakers which will counter the other person. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2017, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/univeristy-of-wisconsin-system-disruptively-protest-3-times-get-expelled/798446/79 "2017-10-11T19:38:47Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > Okay, since you think that we should all know how to engage and learn from hate speech, lets say someone comes up to you, and says that you don’t deserve to live, that you shouldn’t be here, that you should at best be relocated to another country, that you are inferior in every way, that this country does not belong to you. > > What did you learn? What is your response? I Pit them. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Clothahump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/51bf81/32.png) [@Clothahump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Clothahump)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2017, 7:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/univeristy-of-wisconsin-system-disruptively-protest-3-times-get-expelled/798446/80 "2017-10-11T19:58:01Z")
Why three times? Why not one and done? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/univeristy-of-wisconsin-system-disruptively-protest-3-times-get-expelled/798446.md?page=3)