> In a statement to the Tribune, A&M said the decision did not amount to a ban on teaching Plato and that other sections of the same course that include Plato – but do not include modules on race and gender ideology – had been approved.
Just wait until they discover the civilized ancient Greeks were commonly homosexual and even frequently engaged in pedophilia, especially the Spartans.
In all seriousness, I assumed that was part of why the US models itself on Rome rather than Greece. Not that there was no homosexuality in the days of the Roman empire, but there was a lot more performative masculinity to make up for it.
It was entirely predictable that the US alt right Neonazi movement would suppress free speech and academic freedom but it is astonishing how fast they're proceeding with their plans. Jason Stanley and Tim Snyder were right in leaving the US.
So, "conservatives" yell about "preserving western civilization" whilst violating it's core principles of free speech and knowledge inquiry plus banning discussion of a founding thinker of western civilization.
Whatever this is, it is NOT conservative, and it shows no modern right wing argument is ever made in good faith or on principle; the yelling is nothing but whatever sounds good at the moment, and the moment it is inconvenient, it changes.
If anything falls under the core HN guideline, "If you had to reduce it to a sentence, the answer might be: anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity.", it would be this.
I do not know how treatment of a founding thinker of Western Civilization in a top school would not be of intellectual interest.
> In a statement to the Tribune, A&M said the decision did not amount to a ban on teaching Plato and that other sections of the same course that include Plato – but do not include modules on race and gender ideology – had been approved.
Ancient Greece? Not so much.
Whatever this is, it is NOT conservative, and it shows no modern right wing argument is ever made in good faith or on principle; the yelling is nothing but whatever sounds good at the moment, and the moment it is inconvenient, it changes.
They have fewer principles than Vladimir Lenin.
Addendum: 60 minutes on, no one's questioned the spelling or mentioned a 1960 Nobel Prize winner in biology.
If anything falls under the core HN guideline, "If you had to reduce it to a sentence, the answer might be: anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity.", it would be this.
I do not know how treatment of a founding thinker of Western Civilization in a top school would not be of intellectual interest.