Are uni students really this fragile?

FoxEye

FoxEye

FoxEye

Caporegime
Joined
17 Feb 2006
Posts
29,263
Location
Cornwall
Cambridge University society bans speaker over Hitler impression - BBC News

These are supposed to be the best and the brightest (tho Oxford may disagree ;)

Art Historian uses Hitler's words in caricature of Hitler and general discourse about morality, evil and bad taste.

Students decide that quoting Hitler - even to argue that he was evil - makes you racist.

Union president adds historian to a "blacklist" of people never to be allowed to address the union's members ever again. Wants to share this with other unis to blacklist him from all such unions up and down the country.

This is quite disheartening. It seems that debate itself is now a minefield of political correctness, where people are more concerned with having safe spaces than exploring subjects (such as morality and boundaries).

I cannot help but think we are quite deliberately moving into an era of thought crime and authoritarian, draconian rules on what may be said or what may be debated, and any deviation from this will be used to ruin your career at the drop of a hat.

I must earnestly hope that these students fall foul of their own rules, and end up blacklisted for the crime of thinking for themselves, or offending the perpetually offended.

Just makes me sad, really, that we are so soft that this is what we've come to. Soft and daft.

It also annoys the hell out of me that people who look like they're 12 and have never done a day's work in the real world, can feel morally obligated to try to destroy someone's career, for literally no reason at all.
 

Those are the words, the motivations, and mindset of a man that set out a plan to exterminate an entire group of people. Why should they be offended by that, it happened and shouldn't be forgotten. It should be stood up to and understood, even better through debate and it's clearly acting. Not the best though, see Bruno Ganz of Hitler parody meme fame in Downfall for that. Clearly within the scope of the "debate".

Poor taste? Yes. Was that the point of the event? Apparently so.

Hitler was offensive, go to Auschwitz and see what he and his Nazi chums did in all its grotesqueness. Doing an impression (if that even, it could even be seen as a caricature) at a student union is a bit risky these days with all the actual little Hitlers Stalins around, but still a far cry from the atrocities committed in the name of Adolf Hitler. I find that offensive, and I'm not easy to offend.

Should be called a block/deny list any way. Surely blacklist is offensive as it implies a negative on the word "black" as opposed to "white". Racist union President.

EDIT: Or am I missing the point here, and how these debates work; should the chair have intervened as the impression was in "bad taste"? The context is missing in the article and the video above.
 
Last edited:
I don't have my head around this one - I really can't be bothered to spend too much time on it to be frank. But it does seem like poor taste is being made into something bigger and more questionable by lack of objectivity and being triggered by some keywords rather than an understanding of the intentions as illustrated aptly by:

Fubsy said:
Should be called a block/deny list any way. Surely blacklist is offensive as it implies a negative on the word "black" as opposed to "white". Racist union President.
Click to expand...

I kind of wish someone would take the kid to task over it to see him squirm.
 
Last edited:
Yes. Yes, they are. They're a right bunch overly precious little crystals of falling ice these days. Student union types have always been 'right on' and leant a bit towards the loony side of the left, but the perpetually offended brigade of today wouldn't have lasted five minutes back when I, and most of the people on here, was at university. Even their own 'comrades' would've had them scurrying around looking for a safe space to curl up and cry in.
 
You generally leave all the Nazi/holocaust topics alone. I said in a twitch channel run by a Jewish lady I was a holocaust sceptic due to reading some David Irving stuff. Polite but I was promptly banned from the channel.

It's become a bit like climate change or evolution they are protected topics that can't be questioned. It's the same on here if you bring up evolution, you get cut down if you go against the grain. Unless you have a real axe to grind or are a pro historian or educator then no point in getting involved.
 
Last edited:
jsmoke said:
You generally leave all the Nazi/holocaust topics alone. I said in a twitch channel run by a Jewish lady I was a holocaust sceptic due to reading some David Irving stuff. Polite but I was promptly banned from the channel.
Click to expand...

She probably banned you because it makes you sound like an idiot.
 
Sensationalist news headline as always, to appeal to the frothy gammons of the world.

They maintain a black list. They felt, for a grown adult, his parody of Hitler was unnecessary for the debate, in poor taste and insensitive. Ironically he was arguing poor taste and bad morality go hand in hand.

This forum operates a similar black list which would be open to similar criticism.
 
Wow, look at the smug little poncey **** sat there there playing dress up, paid for by mummy and daddy's money - I bet they've never known a day of adversity in their lives. Pathetic.

Thankfully not at all indicative of most university students (even those from Cambridge), but sadly given too much of a voice :(
 
Haggisman said:
Wow, look at the smug little poncey **** sat there there playing dress up, paid for by mummy and daddy's money - I bet they've never known a day of adversity in their lives. Pathetic.

Thankfully not at all indicative of most university students (even those from Cambridge), but sadly given too much of a voice :(
Click to expand...
:confused: bad nights sleep?
 
jsmoke said:
Nah she was just in denial.
Click to expand...

Holocaust denier? They should ban you from this forum tbh.

FoxEye said:
Art Historian uses Hitler's words in caricature of Hitler and general discourse about morality, evil and bad taste.

Students decide that quoting Hitler - even to argue that he was evil - makes you racist.
Click to expand...

No, they decided the way he did it was offensive. I mean.... why impersonate Hitler? Debating Hitlers rhetoric and impersonating him are quite different.
 
jsmoke said:
Nah she was just in denial.
Click to expand...

Or maybe she saw what happened, or had relatives that witnessed what went on in the death camps.

Or as Vinny succinctly put it, probably concluded a level of idiocy that wouldn't bring good things to the channel.
 
Haggisman said:
Are you suggesting that there is something in my post which is inaccurate? :confused:
Click to expand...
Well it was a significantly low IQ post, let's be honest. Talk about judging a book by its cover. It's just a young intelligent lad wearing a jumper whose added some dimwit who LARP'ed as Hitler at a serious debate in a club which he runs at Cambridge University.

Because he wasn't brought up on an estate or his parents were totally useless and he is privileged enough to study where some of the worlds greatest minds have studied, you went off on a rant about his financial position and what he wears.

Just wondered if you had a bad night sleep or if you are typically this offended.
 
dLockers said:
Well it was a significantly low IQ post, let's be honest. Talk about judging a book by its cover. It's just a young intelligent lad wearing a jumper whose added some dimwit who LARP'ed as Hitler at a serious debate in a club which he runs at Cambridge University.

Because he wasn't brought up on an estate or his parents were totally useless and he is privileged enough to study where some of the worlds greatest minds have studied, you went off on a rant about his financial position and what he wears.

Just wondered if you had a bad night sleep or if you are typically this offended.
Click to expand...

I'm going to go ahead and assume you haven't watched the video in post 2, since your perception of the situation is as far removed from reality as that of the participants :cry:

(unless that video is of something else completely, in which case I apologise and have no idea what I'm talking about)

Otherwise - judging a book by its cover?

Perhaps, but based on his mannerisms and the fact he's sat up there laughing smugly at his own witticisms, while partaking in the cancellation and career destruction of someone who is clearly method acting a part to increase its impact, I'm going to suggest that it's more like judging a book by its cover, the foreword, the first 4 chapters, and the little bit of blurb on the back that says "'A complete ****' - The Guardian"
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom