Posted on 11/13/2015 8:19:58 PM PST by John Semmens
The protests at the University of Missouri that resulted in the ouster of President Tim Wolfe and Chancellor R. Bowen Loftin have reinvigorated student movements against freedom of speech across the nation.
Brenda Smith-Lezama, vice president of the Missouri Students Association, took pride in the rising groundswell of support for censorship saying "it's about time the youth of this nation take a stand against the verbal pollution that hides behind the First Amendment. Social justice shouldn't be thwarted by slavish devotion to the out-dated idea that everyone has the right to speak his mind regardless of the consequences."
Smith-Lezama hailed the intimidation of student journalist Tim Tai as "an example of the will of the people triumphing over the sterile notion that the press should be free to oppose progressive values. The people have a right to decide what will be written about. So-called journalists can have no right to independently determine what will or won't be covered if it contradicts the aims of social justice."
At Amherst College student activists have given the administration 48 hours to comply with its list of nonnegotiable demands. Alleging that "freedom of speech is part of this nation's historic legacy of oppression," the activists demanded that students demonstrating for "free speech" and insulting progressives with banners proclaiming "all lives matter," be "warned that statements offensive to social justice will not be tolerated" and that "disciplinary action against future offenders be made a school policy."
At the University of Massachusetts, student protesters vowed "there will be no peace until all university tuition and fees are waived and outstanding student debt is canceled." Chrissy Dasco, of the Center for Educational Policy and Advocacy, argued that "forcing students to pay for their own college education violates the Constitution's guarantees of liberty and pursuit of happiness. A person can't truly be free or happy if he or she is burdened with having to pay for an education. It is the government's obligation to provide a college education to anyone who deserves it. Even the citizens of North Korea have that right."
At Claremont McKenna College in California, Dean of Students Mary Spellman resigned in the face of a threatened hunger-strike by students alleging "lack of support for students of color." The hunger-strikers contend that "the administration's refusal to assign white students to do the work of minority students reneges on the responsibility of the white race to atone for the hundreds of years of slavery imposed on blacks in America. The only way for the scales of social justice to be balanced is for whites to be forced to labor on behalf of blacks, just as blacks were forced to labor on behalf of whites before the Civil War."
President Obama praised the rising tide of student activism calling it "a vindication of my faith in the political wisdom and energy of this country's younger generation. They are breaking free of the traditional constraints of our society and creating new realities with new rules for a new future."
if you missed any of this week's other semi-news/semi-satire posts you can find them at...
https://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Opinion/186534-2015-11-13-semi-news-semi-satire-november-15-2015-edition.htm
ping
HAHA! Nice!
For crap sake John - don't give them any ideas! ;')
If there's satire in there, it's mighty well hidden... It's not fair, John. Ya gotta start putting something implausible in these articles, so I can tell where the satire is.
Good one!! :-)
Are you sure this is satire?
Thanks John! It’s getting harder to laugh. Just when you think it can’t get anymore absurd - you’re forced to expand you concept once again.
I commented to John Semmons a few months ago about my understanding of what satire is and is not, but he would not hear of it. I am glad to see others are seeing my point. Just restating or elaborating the news in a way that follows it to an unsurprising, logical end does not seem all that satirical to me. ....Not saying I could do better, John is an excellent wordsmith..... I meant it as constructive criticism, but he only answered by saying his post were clearly marked as “satire” as if the label was the most important feature of the literature.
Trying to satirize the left these days may be an impossible task. Satire needs an element of outrageousness (and humor) and the way things are going these days it is hard to keep up with the left. What is silly and an outrage today, is fully adopted leftist doctrine by tommorrow morning. John Semmens’ writing may just be a victim of how fast the progressives are descending into madness so that no matter how creative the writing is, it comes across as totally believable and therefore belongs more in the hoax or even the fan fiction genre than satire.
> I am glad to see others are seeing my point.
Alas, I was insufficiently clear about my intent in my comment. I wasn't so much telling John what I thought of his work (although I did that later); I actually was making a statement about the fact that the Leftists are doing and saying things that are so outlandish and outrageous that they make it impossible to write satire about them.
John knows from my previous comments over many years, that when he's done a particularly good job of blurring the line between reality and satire, I jokingly "berate" him for not writing satire but only reporting the news. Unfortunately, without that background, you seem to have taken my comments literally, as if I was complaining about his style of satire. In fact, I was complimenting him.
That said, your point about the difficulty he faces ("Trying to satirize the left these days may be an impossible task. Satire needs an element of outrageousness (and humor) and the way things are going these days it is hard to keep up with the left.") is on the mark. You are quite right that one can't very well write satire about something that on its own reads like satire.
Satire defined: “A text that uses irony, derision, or wit to expose or attack human vice, foolishness, or stupidity.”
I believe my work uses irony, derision, and wit to expose and attack the vice, foolishness and stupidity of the left. It is not as silly-funny as some expect. Perhaps they are more familiar with parody which is defined as “a text that imitates the characteristic style of an author or a work for comic effect.”
While the left is idiotic it not comical. Their delusions are laughable, but not funny. Through my satire I hope to make them look as ridiculous as they really are.
Looks like I read too much into your comment and I apologize for dragging you into my criticism.
You’re the man, John.
Thank you, but no problem and no apology necessary. Everyone has their own take on events and on the commentary (including satirical) about those events, and my comments were not clearly labeled (internet forums should probably require "intent" tags, but they don't...)
Satire at its best blurs the reality/fantasy line, in order to force the reader to consider where they themselves stand. Satire, in my reading experience, is not often funny, and only rarely brings tears of laughter. Most times it is medium dry, and sometimes it is downright bitter.
John generally hews what I consider to be a good path through the mid-range between comedic and bitter. Of course, YMMV.
You're captured the mindset of the stupid totalitarian twits... Good job John...
Good job, John. Thank you for the ping.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.