Group Pays for Surveillance on Professors

An interesting story from UCLA is surfacing about a group offering to pay students to collect information about "radical professors," as part of the new "academic freedom" movement. Is this a case of inverse surveillance to monitor inappropriate activities, or something designed to discourage dissent? Compare also to the dichotomy espoused by some of "can the government view your library records, or do you have something to hide?"

Comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

How Dare Those People!

How dare those people setting up a means to criticize those authority figures at a public institution!

not a problem but...

I would consider bribery as an ineffective means of getting quality information. Either students speak out about what they think is wrong or they don't. Money shouldn't be the deciding factor.

Why all the Orwellian Names?

Why the heck does the far right have to keep coming up with such Orwellian names for things? "Academic Freedom Movement" (trying to squelch any discussion that radical neo-cons disaprove of), "Patriot Act" (evicerating the US Constitution), "Family Values" (spreading hatred and bile-- which last time I checked, weren't values in *my* family) etc.

War Is Peace. Mission Accomplished. Freedom is Slavery. Why do you hate America. Ignorance is Strength. Fair and Balanced Coverage. It's hard to tell which came from the novel "1984", and which came from the current neocon radicals. ("Conserviatives" is another Orwellian misnomer. There's nothing conservative about the freakishly radical neo-con movement...)

Actually, "Ignorance Is Strength" seems to be the motto of this administration...

Re:Why all the Orwellian Names?

"Far right" & "neocon radicals". Looks like someone else is into name calling.

I bet

Yeah, I betcha Dick Cheney or Sam Alito set this thing up at UCLA.

Re:Why all the Orwellian Names?

At least I say what I mean, plainly, instead of couching it in language that means the opposite. You can agree with what I say or disagree with it. But at least I say what I mean, rather than saying one thing and meaning another.

Re:Why all the Orwellian Names?

Any person, administration, party, or political movement that condones torture in any way, shape, or form has absolutely no claim on having the slightest bit of morality. Period.

Re:not a problem but...

I'd do it for free.

Heck I do, I've reported nonsense from professors that I've seen firsthand as well as laughable 'speech codes' to FIRE

Re:Why all the Orwellian Names?

Let me correctly use your language, "... condones torture in any way, shape, or form has absolutely no claim on having the slightest bit of morality. Period. "

Now, I want to raise a hypothetical situation. Say, a bunch of David Duke types have a nuclear suitcase-type weapon in downtown Los Angeles and they threatened to explode it in 3 days. What if the FBI caught one of the Daivd Duke types and interrogated the guy? If after interrogating the guy, they found out these nuts were seriouos and the person knew where it was but wasn't telling. Just for the sake of argument, torture could get the guy to disclose the location of the weapon.

Would it be correct to not torture the guy? Would this make the FBI the moral equivalent to to Stalin's Soviet Union? You may be a fellow traveler, so I make it more palatable and instead use Hilter's Germany.

Re:Why all the Orwellian Names?

"Fellow traveller"? Typical. It ain't over until the fat boy sings and Cheney's sure gaining the weight lately.

Re:Why all the Orwellian Names?

"Fellow traveller"? Typical. It ain't over until the fat boy sings and Cheney's sure gaining the weight lately.

Hits a little to close to home, doesn't it?

Re:Why all the Orwellian Names?

You'd know a lot better than I would.

Syndicate content