ACTA's Must-Reads

Perhaps some good will come of this approach. Perhaps the students -- through the Associated Students perhaps -- will demand that the University restore the job fair and keep order. Perhaps.

Why is there no concern about teaching students how to properly voice dissent in society? All the school is teaching them is that if they physically attack others, they may well intimidate people into doing what they want. No one needs to go to college to learn that (but at least these kids aren't paying Columbia fees).

An essential function of higher education is to prepare students to function as informed, responsible participants in political culture. That entails teaching them to think clearly and to argue persuasively so as to convince others of the merits of their position. All they're learning at Santa Cruz is how to assault and batter people into compliance whenever they encounter someone who disagrees with them.

Does anyone there care that instead of teaching students how to communicate politically in a responsible, reasoned way, they are actively fostering student criminalty? Why not?

F.D., have you spent much time around a university with student and other hecklers acting en masse? There is only so much you can do to "teach" them. Up to a point, it helps. Up to a point.

But if they are determined to shut things down, they will. You can arrest them and haul them off, but at that point, they've already ruined things. Unless the judges are willing to jail them for significant lengths of time, it doesn't do much good.

I don't know what the situation is at UCSC -- has the administration not really tried to put a stop to this? Or have they tried and given up?

I find it very odd that this is called a "heckler's veto." The university is banning a protest and trying to make the protestors look bad by banning the entire event. It's very clever PR, and it seems to have worked. But this kind of administrator censorship is the exact opposite of a heckler's veto. It's more like banning an event because you think there might be a heckler.

Does Santa Cruz not have a police department? I would find that surprising that they don't--but maybe it's just drastically understaffed, in which case why doesn't the PD (or the University) ask the Governator for some CNG troops to keep order?

"F.D., have you spent much time around a university with student and other hecklers acting en masse? There is only so much you can do to "teach" them."

I imagine that this post too will be deleted (I have no idea whatsoever why almost all my posts are being thrown off the site after being posted), but to some extent, yes -- at Berkeley. If the kids are acting out so much that they simply cannot be taught, they must be forcibly removed. There are, in fact, plenty of people are who trying to get an education, and if thugs are actively obviating that education, they must be removed, either temporarily or permanently (depending on the individual).

Federal Dog--

There has been no intentional deletion of any of your posts. The site has, however, been inundated with spam comments (hundreds each day) and in the effort to delete those, it's possible that something you posted was accidentally deleted. If so, I apologize. Please feel free to re-post anything that has disappeared from the site.

Thanks, Professor O'Connor. I honestly thought I had been repeatedly deleted, and could not understand what I had said to cause that. Thanks again for the clarification because I like this site and would have been sorry to have been excluded from it.

Re removing the thugs: sometimes it's just not possible, or too much trouble to put the victims through. Sometimes the hecklers aren't students, by the way.

I know of a case where a U.S. Senator doesn't make public appearances on a certain state university campus, because they always turn into circuses. So, he has appearances with selected groups, unannounced. It is the choice of the senator, not the university, he just doesn't want to go through it.

It may be the same with the job fair. If you invite a bunch of people who want to hire students, and it turns into a circus for them, it may simply not be worth it.

Maybe it's better to tell the students they are losing an opportunity for employment. Maybe that is the best way to get their attention and "educate" them, get them to suppress the thugs, if it's possible.

I don't know the situation at UCSC, but I do know sometimes these problems are just not soluble by the university alone.

Mike wrote:

I know of a case where a U.S. Senator doesn't make public appearances on a certain state university campus, because they always turn into circuses. So, he has appearances with selected groups, unannounced. It is the choice of the senator, not the university, he just doesn't want to go through it.

Which -- to me -- is the definition of a heckler's veto.

,i>It may be the same with the job fair. If you invite a bunch of people who want to hire students, and it turns into a circus for them, it may simply not be worth it.

Which -- to me -- is the purpose of the disruption.

Clawmute

Clawmute: All true. But what to do about it? The senator doesn't want to come, the hecklers (who may not even be students) don't care about the penalties the law is willing to impose. What then?

Far be it for me to presume to tell our august institutions of higher learning how to mete out discipline to their unruly, undisciplined, uncivil and disruptive students . . . the ones who are allowed to exercise a "hecklers veto."

After all, one of the few areas where American universities have established true excellence is in forcing compliance with the rules they choose to enforce.

Historically, their actions included, but have not been limited to, the writing of essays expounding at length on the vices of violating the sensitivities of protected "others" and the virtues of self-censorship; mea cupas, retractions and apologies published publicly in school newspapers; re-education, in the form of "sensitivity sessions;" public censure and even suspension of students who were presumed guilty before all the evidence was in (as in Duke).

I doubt the issue is what can be done so much as it is the will to do it.

Clawmute

"the hecklers (who may not even be students) don't care about the penalties the law is willing to impose."

They will when they're imposed. As an attorney, I've seen the magical effect of criminal charges work wonders for lousy atitudes on numerous occasions.

The question is why UCSC is more devoted to protecting thugs than it is to education and scholarship. What exactly are they receiving from the attackers in exchange for sacrificing their own students?

Some naivete here.

Claw: read what I said. The hecklers may not even be students. As probably was the case with the senator I mentioned. Kicking them out of school is not a help. Places like Santa Cruz have a lot of hangers-on.

Dog: it depends on what the local authorities are willing to do. They can't watch everything all the time. Where I live, they can't even keep up with the meth labs. Breaking and entering is practically not even a crime. The local prisons are full. They have little taste for locking up hecklers.

"They have little taste for locking up hecklers."

That would be a truly abnormal sanction (I have never seen incarceration ordered in a case like this): Rather, it's a question of a stiff money fine (restitution for damages/court costs), and contempt of court if anyone refuses to pay. Works wonders, and helps pays for the costs of prosecution too.

Hard to fine impecunious radical hangers-on! Then they have to lock 'em up.

"Hard to fine impecunious radical hangers-on! Then they have to lock 'em up."

Whatever must be done so that the kids learn basic lessons about properly communicating dissent. Assault and battery is simply not an option. Kids must learn this basic lesson, especially since USCS cannot understand it, and has therefore failed miserably to teach it.

Dog: You'll have to convince the Santa Cruz city council, not me. I really doubt that they care.