Is It Now A Hate Crime To Support Donald Trump On A College Campus? | The Daily Caller
In response to students demanding the school formally denounce Trump, Emory President James Wagner expressed sympathy with the aggrieved students and felt they had legitimate concerns. (RELATED: Emory Students Complain School Is ‘Unsafe’ Because Administrators Tolerate Trump Support)
Wagner said the incident provided the impetus for the university to implement “immediate refinements to certain policy and procedural deficiencies, regular and structured opportunities for difficult dialogues, a formal process to institutionalize identification, review and [the] addressing of social justice opportunities and issues and a commitment to an annual retreat to renew our efforts.”
The student government went further in its concern over the very, very troubling situation and issued a statement that gave credence to the notion the messages jeopardized campus safety.
“[B]y nature of the fact that for a significant portion of our student population, the messages represent particularly bigoted opinions, policies, and rhetoric directed at populations represented at Emory University, we would like to express our concern regarding the values espoused by the messages displayed, and our sympathy for the pain experienced by members of our community,” the body’s Wednesday statement read.
There was even a surprising voice expressing solidarity with the outraged students — prominent libertarian writer Jeffrey Tucker. In an interview with Reason magazine, Tucker — who was on campus at the time Trump markings sent students into a frenzy — said the messages were clearly done for the purpose of racial intimidation.
“It was like cross burning,” the libertarian told Reason’s Robby Soave. Tucker has clearly come a long way from his alleged involvement with the notorious Ron Paul Newsletters in the 1980s and 90s.
In the bubble that Emory University seems to exist in, these markings represent a serious public hazard. In the real world, this uproar represents one of the silliest examples of campus insanity yet.
At worst, these harmless chalk messages should be considered a juvenile prank and promptly scraped away. Even though they probably violated some minor code about unauthorized markings on campus, the slogans declaring “Trump 2016” still represent a form of political speech. The most offensive marking merely said “Build that wall.”
No matter how much students may be offended by the golden-haired billionaire, Trump is now apart of our standard discourse. There’s no way you can wish him away through an arbitrarily-enforced and undemocratic safe space.
In declaring that the school should be free of any problematic mentions of The Donald, Emory essentially endorsed the idea of political censorship and proclaimed itself as an institution totally opposed to Trump.
So much for the idea of a neutral university that serves as a marketplace of ideas.
As the election season continues with no sign of Trump disappearing from sight and the mogul inching closer to the GOP nomination, it’s bound similar incidents like Emory’s hoopla will occur at other campuses with the exact same results.
No matter what the circumstances, college administrators will capitulate to the demands of offended students and issue statements that could be construed as Trump denunciations.
It’s worth noting that Emory’s president at first vowed to send no such condemnation, then conceded and drafted a mealy-mouthed letter of understanding to students. Wagner’s flexible spine is just another example of the strong fortitude university officials demonstrate in the face of safe space agitators.
With the strong possibility of more campus outrage over pro-Trump displays, it comes with the impression that expressing support for the Republican front-runner at a university setting is tantamount to a hate crime.
If “Trump 2016” marked out in chalk can be found to be in the same league as a cross burning, what’s stopping the campus mobs from claiming a student’s Trump sticker on a personal laptop is a form of racial intimidation? Or the sight of a red “Make America Great Again” hat is liable to cause permanent emotional damage?
You can bet on a Trump-supporting student sometime soon facing repercussions from the school over his or her display of Donald fandom. It just takes a small, yet dedicated number of students hailing from a protected class to complain to make it happen.
It makes you wonder how colleges will handle Trump becoming president if students can’t even bear to see his name. Will they institute a policy to ban mentions of the commander in chief to protect the feelings of the snowflake totalitarians?
The Emory affair once again reveals to the country how our college campuses have been overrun with protesters who will exploit their protected class status to stifle free speech and isolate campuses from the American mainstream.
No wonder millions of Americans view political correctness as a threat to our society.
In response to students demanding the school formally denounce Trump, Emory President James Wagner expressed sympathy with the aggrieved students and felt they had legitimate concerns. (RELATED: Emory Students Complain School Is ‘Unsafe’ Because Administrators Tolerate Trump Support)
Wagner said the incident provided the impetus for the university to implement “immediate refinements to certain policy and procedural deficiencies, regular and structured opportunities for difficult dialogues, a formal process to institutionalize identification, review and [the] addressing of social justice opportunities and issues and a commitment to an annual retreat to renew our efforts.”
The student government went further in its concern over the very, very troubling situation and issued a statement that gave credence to the notion the messages jeopardized campus safety.
“[B]y nature of the fact that for a significant portion of our student population, the messages represent particularly bigoted opinions, policies, and rhetoric directed at populations represented at Emory University, we would like to express our concern regarding the values espoused by the messages displayed, and our sympathy for the pain experienced by members of our community,” the body’s Wednesday statement read.
There was even a surprising voice expressing solidarity with the outraged students — prominent libertarian writer Jeffrey Tucker. In an interview with Reason magazine, Tucker — who was on campus at the time Trump markings sent students into a frenzy — said the messages were clearly done for the purpose of racial intimidation.
“It was like cross burning,” the libertarian told Reason’s Robby Soave. Tucker has clearly come a long way from his alleged involvement with the notorious Ron Paul Newsletters in the 1980s and 90s.
In the bubble that Emory University seems to exist in, these markings represent a serious public hazard. In the real world, this uproar represents one of the silliest examples of campus insanity yet.
At worst, these harmless chalk messages should be considered a juvenile prank and promptly scraped away. Even though they probably violated some minor code about unauthorized markings on campus, the slogans declaring “Trump 2016” still represent a form of political speech. The most offensive marking merely said “Build that wall.”
No matter how much students may be offended by the golden-haired billionaire, Trump is now apart of our standard discourse. There’s no way you can wish him away through an arbitrarily-enforced and undemocratic safe space.
In declaring that the school should be free of any problematic mentions of The Donald, Emory essentially endorsed the idea of political censorship and proclaimed itself as an institution totally opposed to Trump.
So much for the idea of a neutral university that serves as a marketplace of ideas.
As the election season continues with no sign of Trump disappearing from sight and the mogul inching closer to the GOP nomination, it’s bound similar incidents like Emory’s hoopla will occur at other campuses with the exact same results.
No matter what the circumstances, college administrators will capitulate to the demands of offended students and issue statements that could be construed as Trump denunciations.
It’s worth noting that Emory’s president at first vowed to send no such condemnation, then conceded and drafted a mealy-mouthed letter of understanding to students. Wagner’s flexible spine is just another example of the strong fortitude university officials demonstrate in the face of safe space agitators.
With the strong possibility of more campus outrage over pro-Trump displays, it comes with the impression that expressing support for the Republican front-runner at a university setting is tantamount to a hate crime.
If “Trump 2016” marked out in chalk can be found to be in the same league as a cross burning, what’s stopping the campus mobs from claiming a student’s Trump sticker on a personal laptop is a form of racial intimidation? Or the sight of a red “Make America Great Again” hat is liable to cause permanent emotional damage?
You can bet on a Trump-supporting student sometime soon facing repercussions from the school over his or her display of Donald fandom. It just takes a small, yet dedicated number of students hailing from a protected class to complain to make it happen.
It makes you wonder how colleges will handle Trump becoming president if students can’t even bear to see his name. Will they institute a policy to ban mentions of the commander in chief to protect the feelings of the snowflake totalitarians?
The Emory affair once again reveals to the country how our college campuses have been overrun with protesters who will exploit their protected class status to stifle free speech and isolate campuses from the American mainstream.
No wonder millions of Americans view political correctness as a threat to our society.