Patterico's Pontifications

7/20/2017

UC Berkeley Says Not So Fast To Another Conservative Speaker, Terms To Be Worked Out (UPDATE ADDED)

Filed under: General — Dana @ 6:36 am



[guest post by Dana]

I’m seeing a pattern. It looks like University of California, Berkeley is still struggling with issues of speech. Particularly speech from conservatives. This time, as with Ann Coulter earlier this year, administrators are using the flimsy excuse that they can’t find a suitable location to host conservative speaker Ben Shapiro.

From the Washington Examiner:

Young America’s Foundation announced that administrators informed the Berkeley College Republicans in an email this week they were “unable to identify an available campus venue” to host the lecture, which was slated for Sept. 14. The administrators, identified by YAF as Dean of Students Joseph Greenwell and Student Organization Coordinator Millicent Morris Chaney, claimed the lecture was spiked “despite extensive efforts.”

“Ben Shapiro is welcome on our campus, and we are committed to supporting his, and your, rights to free speech,” the administrators contended in their message to students, which was sent Tuesday.

The YAF isn’t buying it:

“Berkeley’s inability to find a lecture hall more than two months in advance is laughable,” the Foundation declared in its statement, noting the university’s insistence that it can only host Shapiro “when events are held at a time and location that allow for the provision of any required security measures.”

“An endless stream of liberal speakers continue to be granted opportunities to speak, unobstructed by time, place, or manner restrictions while conservatives are continually treated unequally, and repeatedly relegated to the margins of campus activity,” YAF explained in the statement.

Earlier this year I had the opportunity to attend a lecture by Shapiro at our local university. There were no hysterical protests or riots. Instead, a group of 20 or 30 students held a rather sad looking “dance-off protest” about 50 yards away from the building where he was speaking. Inside the packed hall, there was an assembled group representing just about every age and ethnicity possible. It was a respectful audience, and when Q&A time came, a solid line of men and women snaked all the way to the back door waiting their turn to address Shapiro. He didn’t shy away from anything thrown at him. He spent the most time with a young woman who challenged him on a woman’s right to have an abortion. And in spite of her continually moving the goal posts in an effort to rattle him – which Shapiro patiently pointed out each time – he was consistent in his viewpoints as he thoughtfully responded to her. In light of my experience, I can only assume that UC Berkeley must be made up of an awfully fearful and timid group of faculty and students. Because really, why else be so afraid?

For his part, Shapiro, who spoke at Berekely in 2016 without any problems, vows to fight back:

We’re coming to Berkeley, regardless of attempts to stop us. It’s just a question of when and where. Stay tuned.

(Cross-posted at The Jury Talks Back.)

–Dana

UPDATE: It looks like the show will go on after all:

“It’s clear that we have a number of workable options,” said Dan Mogulof, Berkeley’s assistant vice chancellor for public affairs. “This event is going to happen. We just need to sit down with the College Republicans to talk through the details.”

He said it was unclear whether the Berkeley College Republicans had been informed of the news.

Mogulof said Berkeley reconsidered its initial denial of the College Republicans’ request for a free, centrally located, 500-seat campus venue. Berkeley initially said the College Republicans didn’t follow the rules by pre-booking Shapiro before they asked whether the university had a room available.

“We didn’t have any options in terms of the spaces available free of charge,” Mogulof told FIRE, but “because of the extent of our commitment to free speech, the campus will help fund any fees associated with hosting this event if need be.”

The Daily Wire is also reporting that at the time of this report, the “Berkeley College Republicans confirmed that they haven’t heard from the administration directly.”

Also, the Foundation for Rights Individual Rights in Education (F.I.R.E.) brings clarification with a fuller reporting of the exchange between the university and Berkeley College Republicans. As such, I have changed the title of the post in an effort to more accurately reflect that the university offered to “negotiate the terms of the event”.

Further, in catching up with the comments, I see that Dave posted this comment: “Also, the title of this post is false and misleading. Berkeley has not “said no” to Shapiro; as the university statement shows, they said the exact opposite.” While I don’t agree that Berkeley said the “exact opposite,” I would agree that in light of the clarification, the original title of the post was inaccurate and misleading.

50 Responses to “UC Berkeley Says Not So Fast To Another Conservative Speaker, Terms To Be Worked Out (UPDATE ADDED)”

  1. Seriously pressed for time. Apologies for any editing errors…

    Dana (023079)

  2. Birthplace of The Free Speech Movement.

    lol

    harkin (536957)

  3. Well, actually, Berkeley is the birthplace of something far more significant: Going out in public without shaving, bathing, or brushing your teeth.

    nk (dbc370)

  4. And do we really need to keep repeating the fiction that Berkeley was the birthplace of the free speech movement? The birthplace of the free speech movement, in the United States and I’d say the whole world too, was Philadelphia in 1776.

    nk (dbc370)

  5. Damned if they do, damned if they didnt. If they let Shapiro speak, but not others, the antisemite fringe wing of alt rightdom would have a cow.

    urbanleftbehind (bffb9b)

  6. Berkeley: Birthplace of the speech-free movement.

    Karl Lembke (e37f42)

  7. Tolerance for many points of view = diversity.
    Tolerance for only one point of view = university.

    Karl Lembke (e37f42)

  8. Well, actually, Berkeley is the birthplace of something far more significant: Going out in public without shaving, bathing, or brushing your teeth.”

    I still remember remarking to my friend on my first visit to Berkeley in the mid-70s that a more apt name for People’s Park was Poopoo Park, and we’re not talking dog stools.

    But then what do you expect from a city that ordered their fire department to quit exhibiting American flags because they were offensive to some?

    harkin (536957)

  9. A little more serious on this one:
    I think Berkeley feels empowered to do this only because conservative don’t riot the way progressives do.

    Karl Lembke (e37f42)

  10. 5 – “Damned if they do, damned if they didnt. If they let Shapiro speak, but not others, the antisemite fringe wing of alt rightdom would have a cow.

    That’s OK, they’ll be welcome at the Chicago Gay Pride March where the Star of David is verboten.

    harkin (536957)

  11. They asked for a 500-seat auditorium at 7pm on one specific date. There can’t be more than a handful of those.

    The university offered a smaller venue on that date, and expressed willingness to look at other dates.

    “We are confident that arrangements can and will be made for Mr. Shapiro to speak on the Berkeley campus, with the exact date and time depending only on the availability of an appropriate venue and the recommendations of law enforcement professionals,” Mogulof [UC spokesman] said in the statement.

    People are really too eager to confirm their biases by finding sinister motives where none exist.

    Dave (711345)

  12. Also, the title of this post is false and misleading. Berkeley has not “said no” to Shapiro; as the university statement shows, they said the exact opposite.

    Dave (711345)

  13. Remove their funding. Obvious case of trying to reinstate “separate, but equal” when they clearly know it is not equal.

    NJRob (7f4bec)

  14. “We have an autocracy which runs this university. It’s managed. We asked the following: if President Kerr actually tried to get something more liberal out of the Regents in his telephone conversation, why didn’t he make some public statement to that effect? And the answer we received — from a well-meaning liberal — was the following: He said, “Would you ever imagine the manager of a firm making a statement publicly in opposition to his board of directors?” That’s the answer! Now, I ask you to consider: if this is a firm, and if the Board of Regents are the board of directors, and if President Kerr in fact is the manager, then I’ll tell you something: the faculty are a bunch of employees, and we’re the raw material! But we’re a bunch of raw material[s] that don’t mean to have any process upon us, don’t mean to be made into any product, don’t mean to end up being bought by some clients of the University, be they the government, be they industry, be they organized labor, be they anyone! We’re human beings!

    [Wild applause.]

    There is a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart, that you can’t take part; you can’t even passively take part, and you’ve got to put your bodies upon the gears and upon the wheels, upon the levers, upon all the apparatus, and you’ve got to make it stop. And you’ve got to indicate to the people who run it, to the people who own it, that unless you’re free, the machine will be prevented from working at all!

    [Prolonged applause.]

    Now, no more talking. We’re going to march in singing “We Shall Overcome.” Slowly; there are a lot of us. Up here to the left — I didn’t mean the pun.”

    Mario Savio 1964

    Ben burn (b3d5ab)

  15. Selma remembers non-white free speech.

    Ben burn (b3d5ab)

  16. 1964 a bigly year. Conservative acceptance of civil rights…nah!

    Ben burn (b3d5ab)

  17. You have to understand free speech from the mind of marcuse, the Frankfurt school exile and oss veteran, it is designed to free ourselves of bourgeois notions.

    narciso (d1f714)

  18. 11 –“People are really too eager to confirm their biases by finding sinister motives where none exist.”

    Nice try.

    Like the campus police being told to stand down while Antifa thugs rioted over Milo??

    “They were unable to assist the citizens and the public that were out there that were defenseless against these rioters, who were actively engaging in breaking the law and attacking defenseless citizens,” said John Bakhit, an attorney who represents the Federated University Police Officers Association.
    Bakhit said in an interview that UC Berkeley police officers were ordered not to take any enforcement action against protesters who lit fires and threw rocks, bottles and fireworks at them. He said there weren’t enough officers on hand at the start of the protests to make arrests and protect the public.

    “When these rioters saw that there was no action taken against them, it emboldened them into acting more aggressively,” Bakhit said.”

    Here’s a post from a police officer complaining of same:

    https://ibankcoin.com/zeropointnow/files/2017/02/cophere22.png

    harkin (536957)

  19. What does anyone expect from a university system run by Janet Napolitano? If UC is ever again to live up to its motto (Let there be light) Napolitano and her cabal of lesbian man-haters must be exposed for the corrupt money grubbing Stalinists responsible for turning America’s premier public university system into a boot camp for leftist thugs who graduate with degrees in violence, intolerance, totalitarianism, and sedition.

    ropelight (a7d89c)

  20. Marcuse called for repressive tolerance to stamp out counterrevolutionary activity, or as one u Texas professor Jonathan Brown put it, gusano tendencies

    narciso (d1f714)

  21. Remove their funding. Obvious case of trying to reinstate “separate, but equal” when they clearly know it is not equal.

    They’re a state institution. They can be sued and prosecuted under the Anti-Ku Klux Klan laws. Seriously.

    nk (dbc370)

  22. William F. Buckley

    The central question that emerges—and it is not a parliamentary question or a question that is answered by merely consulting a catalog of the rights of American citizens, born Equal—is whether the White community in the South is entitled to take such measures as are necessary to prevail, politically and culturally, in areas in which it does not predominate numerically? The sobering answer is Yes—the White community is so entitled because, for the time being, it is the advanced race.
    National Review believes that the South’s premises are correct. If the majority wills what is socially atavistic, then to thwart the majority may be, though undemocratic, enlightened. It is more important for any community, anywhere in the world, to affirm and live by civilized standards, than to bow to the demands of the numerical majority. Sometimes it becomes impossible to assert the will of a minority, in which case it must give way; and the society will regress; sometimes the numerical minority cannot prevail except by violence: then it must determine whether the prevalence of its will is worth the terrible price of violence.

    Ben burn (b3d5ab)

  23. Besides being a Marxist jackalope he commits basic factual errors like mixing up Pepin bosch of Bacardi, with Orlando bosch.

    narciso (d1f714)

  24. So on Berkeley’s campus in the 80s, there was one pronounced conservative Paul seabury. Nowadays I don’t think there is any.

    narciso (d1f714)

  25. So the fellow behind the transgender push is a sec offender hiding out in Australia, the one behind the derogation of the travel ban is one of the flying imams

    narciso (d1f714)

  26. The fellow prime minister zoolander awarded 10 million, is part of the Canadian Egyptian crowded I mean kadr gang. And so on and so on Michael Walsh’s last project was on the Frankfurt school. Ballard used to keen on gramsci, the one man Italian counterpart. Then we have Lind a sarsours Hamas fan girl

    narciso (d1f714)

  27. Like the campus police being told to stand down while Antifa thugs rioted over Milo??

    So you are contending that the university planned to permit a riot by intentionally leaving the police understrength? Thanks for proving and reinforcing my point.

    The university police made extensive security preparations for Milo, including two sets of barriers.

    But they did not plan for an organized mass army of armed rioters, which would have required far more police – in full riot gear – than were on hand when the attack began.

    Do you really think Janet Napolitano was in tactical command of the police on the scene? The police made a command decision, based on their professional training and experience, about what they had the capability to do; making the wrong decision could well have gotten some of them killed.

    It obviously would have been desirable to arrest the people who were breaking the law. But politics had nothing to do with the reason it didn’t happen.

    Dave (711345)

  28. It obviously would have been desirable to arrest the people who were breaking the law. But politics had nothing to do with the reason it didn’t happen.

    Where did you hear that, CNN?

    Rev.Hoagie® (630eca)

  29. People are really too eager to confirm their biases by finding sinister motives where none exist.
    Dave

    Or by deliberately ignoring them when they do exist.

    Rev.Hoagie® (630eca)

  30. Where did you hear that, CNN?

    Nope, conclusion based on readily available sources and statements by law enforcement officials.

    References cited in the Wikipedia article are a good place to start.

    Dave (711345)

  31. “So you are contending that the university planned to permit a riot by intentionally leaving the police understrength? Thanks for proving and reinforcing my point.”

    You quoted me directly so all I can say is it reinforces your inability to read.

    Please feel free to quote me where I said the university “planned” to permit a riot.

    What they did do was “allow” a riot to escalate, resulting in vandalism, arson and injury by not only telling officers to stand down and take no “enforcement action” but also telling reinforcement police forces NOT to go to the scene.

    That’s not ME saying that, that’s multiple police officers plus an attorney for their union.

    If you disagree you are calling multiple cops liars, not me.

    harkin (536957)

  32. The book is,called the devil’s palace, the gulf states followed this model of reward and prescription as steven emerson pointed out in American house of saud.

    narciso (d1f714)

  33. nk (dbc370) — 7/20/2017 @ 7:03 am

    You can go further back then that. William Tyndale, John Milton and George Fox, for example. And if I poked around I could probably find earlier examples, but not necessarily Anglophones.

    Rev.Hoagie® (630eca) — 7/20/2017 @ 8:10 am

    I guess you never heard “judge every man in the scale of merit”. You’re always eager to judge them in the scale of guilt…

    kishnevi (bb03e6)

  34. Or by deliberately ignoring them when they do exist.

    Let’s see the evidence. I’ve cited plenty, you’ve only cited a quote by a union lawyer that supports my position, not yours:

    He said there weren’t enough officers on hand at the start of the protests to make arrests and protect the public.

    I’m looking forward to any evidence you can provide showing the university officials had advance knowledge of the 100-200 paramilitary rioters who infiltrated the event, and their tactics, told their police not to deploy a sufficient force to counter them, and then wrote off over $100K of damage to university property just to keep an Alt-Right queer from doing his stand-up routine for an hour…

    Dave (711345)

  35. It’s curious about tyndale he providexthe rationale for henry to break away from the church, henrt had him killed for it.

    narciso (d1f714)

  36. Wasn’t Tyndale just building on Wycliff/Wyclife/Wycliffe*

    *Fixed spelling was possibly only after the printing press got popular. I suppose I should add Caxton to my list.

    Oh, and of course, the men who wrote Martin Marprelate….

    Which in a way explains Ken Burns’s comment about the national parks. Everything in 1776-89 was using ideas already current in Enlightenment thinking, and insisting on the “rights of Englishmen”. The only specifically American component was coming up with a framework to put those ideas into practice.

    kishnevi (bb03e6)

  37. What they did do was “allow” a riot to escalate, resulting in vandalism, arson and injury by not only telling officers to stand down and take no “enforcement action” but also telling reinforcement police forces NOT to go to the scene.

    You are the one calling a cop a liar with that last assertion:

    “We were actually waiting for mutual aid to come because we knew we were going to need those extra lines of officers to move people off the campus and disperse the crowd,” said Berkeley Police chief Margo Bennett.

    Both Oakland Police and Alameda County Sheriff’s sent officers to help U.C. police.

    Source: “Police criticized for lack of action during U.C. Berkeley protests”

    Saying they “allowed” a riot to escalate implies there were better choices available. Again, the police say there were not:

    Berkeley Police Sgt. Sabrina Reich defended the response, saying officers feared increased violence and more serious injuries if the violence escalated accompanied by a heavier-handed police response. Investigators are reviewing extensive video taken during the protest and more arrests are possible, she said.

    Several officers did fire paint-ball like guns to mark rioters for detention and their possible arrest, she said. But if officers had made more arrests at the scene, up to three officers would have had to give up crowd control duty to escort each suspected rioter to jail, Reich said.

    “It was a crowd-control situation,” Reich said. “We steered clear of individual action.”

    Berkeley campus police had never encountered Black Bloc tactics before the protest, Reich said, “something we’ll have to prepare for and address going forward.”

    And regardless, you have provided no evidence of any sinister political motives.

    The police were caught unprepared for the scale of what they faced, it’s as simple as that.

    Dave (711345)

  38. 35 – “Alt-Right queer”

    SNAP! -dead giveaway.

    Why is the left so filled with hate-mongers?

    I’m looking forward to any evidence……”

    Hopefully it will come out in the multiple lawsuits which have been filed.

    Im sure the mayor’s actions will be interesting……

    http://amp.dailycaller.com/2017/04/21/berkeley-mayor-publicly-belongs-to-violent-leftist-group/

    harkin (536957)

  39. according to Berkeley Police chief Margo Bennett.”

    You mean the police chief who had her badge, gun and ammunition stolen?

    https://www.google.com/amp/www.sfgate.com/bayarea/amp/UC-Berkeley-police-chief-had-only-herself-to-6472361.php

    Who to believe, Barney Fife or cops on the scene…….

    harkin (536957)

  40. Why is the left so filled with hate-mongers?

    You’d have to ask a leftist.

    I was mocking Milo because the idea that university engineered, or tolerated, a riot, and wrote off over $100K worth of property damage, merely to prevent such a risible figure from spouting his idiocy for an hour or two is ludicrous.

    That point, unfortunately, seems to have eluded you.

    Dave (711345)

  41. They’re a state institution. They can be sued and prosecuted under the Anti-Ku Klux Klan laws. Seriously.

    nk (dbc370) — 7/20/2017 @ 7:46 am

    That would require finding a California prosecutor willing to do the deed, correct?

    NJRob (7f4bec)

  42. You mean the police chief who had her badge, gun and ammunition stolen?

    Ooh, an ad hominem attack! How original! And persuasive too!

    Dave (711345)

  43. One finds it surprising hard to find in the library

    https://www.amazon.com/Devils-Pleasure-Palace-Critical-Subversion-ebook/dp/B00PSSEIXE

    narciso (d1f714)

  44. NJRob @42. US Attorney (DOJ) for the criminal prosecution; private attorney for civil damages.

    nk (dbc370)

  45. Ooh, an ad hominem attack! How original!”

    You were the one who used a police officer who did not understand step one in protecting her badge, gun, ammo etc. in a high crime area as someone speaking with competence regarding law enforcement. Even the very liberal SFGate implied she was a fool.

    Own it.

    harkin (536957)

  46. Oh yeah, there’s this too:

    “Under California law a handgun can legally be transported with a motor vehicle without a permit only by carrying it:
    Unloaded
    Locked in the vehicle’s trunk or in a separate locked container other than the utility or glove compartment
    If the vehicle does not have a trunk, it must be carried in a “locked container” separate from the utility or glove compartment.”

    She had her piece with the ammo in a computer bag in plain view bro.

    Not sure if she broke the law but regardless we’re talking Keystone Cops here.

    harkin (536957)

  47. Forget it Jake, it’s Berkeley”

    Or

    Dude, things have changed since antifa got their ace kicked. And the Berkelites are on notice that they are being watched, recorded and monitored.

    Bang Gunley (5a4596)

  48. UPDATE: It looks like the show will go on after all:

    “It’s clear that we have a number of workable options,” said Dan Mogulof, Berkeley’s assistant vice chancellor for public affairs. “This event is going to happen. We just need to sit down with the College Republicans to talk through the details.”

    He said it was unclear whether the Berkeley College Republicans had been informed of the news.

    Mogulof said Berkeley reconsidered its initial denial of the College Republicans’ request for a free, centrally located, 500-seat campus venue. Berkeley initially said the College Republicans didn’t follow the rules by pre-booking Shapiro before they asked whether the university had a room available.

    “We didn’t have any options in terms of the spaces available free of charge,” Mogulof told FIRE, but “because of the extent of our commitment to free speech, the campus will help fund any fees associated with hosting this event if need be.”

    The Daily Wire is also reporting that at the time of this report, the “Berkeley College Republicans confirmed that they haven’t heard from the administration directly.”

    Also, the Foundation for Rights Individual Rights in Education (F.I.R.E.) brings clarification with a fuller reporting of the exchange between the university and Berkeley College Republicans. As such, I have changed the title of the post in an effort to more accurately reflect that the university offered to “negotiate the terms of the event”.

    Further, in catching up with the comments, I see that Dave posted this comment: “Also, the title of this post is false and misleading. Berkeley has not “said no” to Shapiro; as the university statement shows, they said the exact opposite.” While I don’t agree that Berkeley said the “exact opposite,” I would agree that in light of the clarification, the original title of the post was inaccurate and misleading.

    Dana (023079)

  49. Berkeley’s inability to find a lecture hall more than two months in advance is laughable,” the Foundation declared in its statement, noting the university’s insistence that it can only host Shapiro “when events are held at a time and location that allow for the provision of any required security measures.”

    Earth to Berkeley: when people riot, arrest them, every one of them, every time they riot.

    And suspend/expel them when they block the free flow of movement and when they take over offices. Show them that behaving like petulant children and braying like farm animals during speaking engagements are not university-level debate techniques.

    People who burn/trash/destroy/assault because they think Shapiro/Milo’s/Coulter’s word are violence are not operating in the world of reason.

    Problem solved and free speech will actually exist on the campus which used to brag about it. They might even discover the difference between speech and violence.

    harkin (13f927)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2971 secs.