The thoughtcrime infrastructure already exists in most states, spawned from templates created on College Campuses. So-called Diversity and anti-discrimination commissions are nothing more than a grown-up version of the Bias Response Team, as Orwellian a thing as can be imagined.
Related: Martin Luther King Jr. – “Somewhere I read of the freedom of speech”
Bias Response Teams are the boot of Big Brother. This body, whose existence is sanctioned by the University, exists to investigate anonymous accusations “by individuals whether they take place in a private conversation or in a classroom environment.”
In the case at hand (vs. the Univ. of Illinois) ‘Speech First,’ which is challenging the constitutionality of the Bias Response Team’s chilling effect on Free Speech,
“… argued that while the school doesn’t “prosecute” student speech, an e-mail to an accused student from a campus administrator does carry some weight. Speech First has argued that administrators contacting students to discuss their speech amounts to a “process-is-punishment” mechanism to prevent students from speaking out.
“The lesson is, we are watching you and you better watch what you say,” Connelly told the judges, noting that a student who receives an email from BART for speaking out on a specific issue is less likely to speak out on that issue again.”
The entire campus and everyone in it are wired on a hair-trigger to report anything and everything that can be construed as bias. In that environment, it is impossible to encourage or even have an open debate about any issue. First Amendment rights are suppressed by default. Even supposedly private conversations between consenting individuals, whether or not it includes specific language that may offend others, could still result in a report. You just have to be uncomfortable and complain.
Connelly told the judges he understands the need for bias response teams if they are used for student counseling purposes, but argued the Illinois system was designed to punish those who speak, not comfort those who hear speech they don’t like. He noted that the ability of students to report anonymously – the majority of whom do – is proof the program targets those expressing themselves and not the “victims” of such speech.
And that is the point.
The Social Justice Movement does not exist to empower individuals to embrace diversity or equality. It suppresses all ideas and words outside the approved lexicon. And it is not just speech crime but thought crime. You can be found guilty based entirely on what other people want to believe you mean, not what you every actually thought or intended.
The Bias response teams, and their grown-up projections are no different than the tribunals that declared women witches whose only proof of innocence was often their own death by means of their accusers choosing. The modern version is no different. You are socially burned at the stake based on the will of others with regard to their perception and factors over which you may have no control like you age, sex, or race.
Simply being the wrong thing condemns you. Daring to speak about it just makes matters worse, so groups like Speech First are stepping in to defend student rights.
In September of last year, the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals approved Speech First’s request for a preliminary injunction against Michigan, suggesting Michigan’s speech code and bias response team violated students’ First Amendment rights.
In response to this ruling, Michigan settled with Speech First, dismantling its bias team and replacing it with a “Campus Climate Support” program that does not contact the subjects of complaints, only reporting parties.
And does the Support program teach the snowflakes how not to melt or by comforting does it enable them further?
