Will The Insurgent Protest Itself?
While I’m here, why not take a relaxing stroll down memory lane: all the way back to 2005, when the issue of controversial speech on campus was also in the news. Back then, of course, the issue was whether the Commentator was allowed to mock a student senator who I can’t be bothered to name here for demanding that the ODE refer to him as “ze” instead of “he” in their stories. The Insurgent allied themselves firmly with a branch of student government that did its very best to have the Commentator shut down, and provided us with many instructive quotes along the way:
As a student who pays incidental fees, I refuse to allow my fees to promote hate…
That’s Insurgent fellow-traveller Stacy Bourke, expressing her views on the range of opinions the incidental fee should subsidize on campus.
I don’t think students should pay for hateful messages. That’s poor use of student money.
That’s disgraced fomer PFC member Mason Quiroz, in an article that points out that he “is not judging the [campus publication]’s content, but rather how that content might affect students.”
My favorite, though, is:
[Someone who might as well have been Zachary White] is by far not the only person who feels threatened by the [campus publication]’s material, just the first person with the skills and courage to start dealing with it. people have been complaining for years about the way the [campus publication] reinforces oppression, it’s just that there hasn’t been a coherent attempt to deal with it before now. honestly, i’m not sure why people are complaining that it’s happening now rather than asking why nothing was done before.
That little gem is the work of Insurgent collective member Pira “Anti-Capitalism? I Thought You Said Anti-Capitalization!” Kelly, who strove so valiantly last year to have the Commentator kicked off campus.
One wonders how the Insurgent collective - and especially Ms. Kelly - likes these particular apples.
April 23rd, 2006 at 12:50 am
Hey, I’ve “borked” tons of women in my day.
Wait, you’ve borked?
Dude, are you a virgin?
Sorry, couldn’t resist a “40-Year-Old Virgin” quote at Stacy Borke’s expense.
April 23rd, 2006 at 10:24 am
Socialism is a life spreading lies and hypocrisy.
April 23rd, 2006 at 11:26 am
It’s a bit difficult to process this new free speech brouhaha without the clarifying wisdom of Aaron Shakra. What was it he said last year? Ah, here it is:
“[I]t is not unexpected that Commentator staff members would turn to the First Amendment instead of taking responsibility for their privilege. And as the microcosmic vanguard for white, patriarchal America on campus, the law fully supports the publication’s position.”
Because that’s why we have the First Amendment: to protect the privileged white patriarchal vanguard. Black is white, Whitney Houston has a new line of fitness videos, and prohibition of government suppression benefits the powerful!
April 23rd, 2006 at 4:07 pm
Dan-
Those fuck stains said that last year? My how times change. Unfortunately the commentator has lost its title, to the insurgent, as the “vanguard for white, patriarchal America on campus which the [First Amendment] fully supports..”
April 23rd, 2006 at 5:17 pm
Not “those fuck stains”, Andy: Aaron Shakra! C’mon!
Nice catch, Dan. I forgot he joined in the fun.
Of course, “feelings” aren’t considered within a system of law that prides itself on supposed “rationality” and “objectivity”…
Oh, the “humanity”!
April 23rd, 2006 at 9:21 pm
Hell, they can try to offend me. They won’t.
Those it does offend, need to get thicker skins.
April 23rd, 2006 at 11:08 pm
Miles, if nothing offends you, then you have no decency. Is that a trait you really want?
April 23rd, 2006 at 11:39 pm
Now that, Andy, offends the hell out of me. Where do you get off saying such a thing, Oh Great Judge that thou art? Just because I don’t let the slimeballs at the Insurgent get under my skin, that means I don’t have decency?
You talking to me about decency is like trying to make a turtle teach a class on algebra. It makes no sense.
April 24th, 2006 at 8:49 am
Kids, don’t make me turn this blog around.
April 24th, 2006 at 9:50 am
I didn’t mean just the insurgent - I said if NOTHING…
April 24th, 2006 at 12:38 pm
Dude, Andy, I think I’ve stated this privately, but I’ll make it publically known now. Your being offended by something as juvenile as a poorly drawn picture of Jesus with an erection is none of my concern, nor anybody else’s. The world is full of assholes, Andy, and most of them do not take your faith as seriously as you do (that’s sort of the problem with faith, isn’t it?). Is it more appropriate to respond with an emotionally driven, utterly witless decry, “They’re fuckstains; I’m offended!” or is it better to humorously and persuasively show these people, and others, the folly of their judgment, as Olly has done. Having a thick skin does not mean that you are incapable of being offended, but, I think, it means having the ability to keep your sense of bemusement and wit during times of controversy. You can cry and whine, add your voice to caterwaul, but by doing so you give these people the advantage.
The Insurgent collective is hypocritical to an extent that seriously blows my mind, but there is absolutely no need wax apoplectic, or claim that your beliefs have somehow been raped.
April 24th, 2006 at 12:52 pm
The Insurgent collective is hypocritical to an extent that seriously blows my mind, but there is absolutely no need wax apoplectic, or claim that your beliefs have somehow been raped.
And indeed, when you do that you play into their hands. They want to offend Christians and have their opinions taken seriously.
April 24th, 2006 at 8:12 pm
“Socialism is a life spreading lies and hypocrisy.”
It’s not TiVo, but it’s a damn good life all the same.
April 27th, 2006 at 9:25 am
[…] Congrats to the Commentator for being the only consistent voice for free speech during this debate. And yes, that includes the Insurgent, which had a very different reaction to the virtues of free expression a few years ago when it was the Commentator that was on the hot seat. The Commentator also found time on its blog to respond to the student who wanted to de-fund the Insurgent over its publication of the cartoons — and it got that right, too. […]
April 28th, 2006 at 1:42 pm
Adrian Gilmore (see Stacey Bourke link) is right. There is a reason free speech appears in the First Amendment: The first two of the twelve proposed amendments comprising the Bill of Rights were not adopted, leaving the third proposed amendment to become to first to be adopted. i.e. The order was an accident of fate, not a cosmic statement of the relative importance of the rights contained in the respective amendments.
April 28th, 2006 at 2:13 pm
My personal opinion is that the 2nd amendment is the most important, because you can defend all the other rights if you’re sufficiently armed.
April 29th, 2006 at 2:59 pm
But we still need reasonable gun control…
April 29th, 2006 at 10:18 pm
That’s called hitting what you shoot at.