We do have to take it seriously. We, collectively, all people who find this paper to be shocking and foolish, need to loudly declare it as such and ridicule the notion.
If this kind of thinking is tolerated without pushback, it will become the default. Advocates of this thinking are dedicated radicals who care more about implementing it than most people like you (not meaning offense) who would just chuckle and do nothing, thinking it is silly.
This is Stanford University. This is a prestigious engineering university, not UMass Amherst.
---
edit to add: The thing that absolutists don't appreciate, whether they are far-woke speech warriors like this submission, or far-right conservatives worried about any shift in the status-quo, is that *there is a line, somewhere in the middle, for all things*. We need to be thoughtful about some speech, but this list is the logical extreme of it. We need to understand systemic racism exists in the US, but we don't need to make every single aspect of society revolve around race. We need to support the poor and the uneducated and the unemployed more than we do today, but we don't need to give them blank checks or have completely open borders.
In American discussion today, there seems to be little room for nuance like this, for "practical lines" like this, because each side either wants or is afraid of an idea being taken to its logical extreme.
It is up to people who agree with this to understand that there is a line, and as such, one needs to *hold that line*. Radicals will try to push it too far, and we need to stop them vocally. "c"onservatives will try never to move the line, and we need to make them budge.
It is not feasible to "just ignore" any large organization looking to move the line too far. It has to be actively challenged.
If this kind of thinking is tolerated without pushback, it will become the default. Advocates of this thinking are dedicated radicals who care more about implementing it than most people like you (not meaning offense) who would just chuckle and do nothing, thinking it is silly.
This is Stanford University. This is a prestigious engineering university, not UMass Amherst.
---
edit to add: The thing that absolutists don't appreciate, whether they are far-woke speech warriors like this submission, or far-right conservatives worried about any shift in the status-quo, is that *there is a line, somewhere in the middle, for all things*. We need to be thoughtful about some speech, but this list is the logical extreme of it. We need to understand systemic racism exists in the US, but we don't need to make every single aspect of society revolve around race. We need to support the poor and the uneducated and the unemployed more than we do today, but we don't need to give them blank checks or have completely open borders.
In American discussion today, there seems to be little room for nuance like this, for "practical lines" like this, because each side either wants or is afraid of an idea being taken to its logical extreme.
It is up to people who agree with this to understand that there is a line, and as such, one needs to *hold that line*. Radicals will try to push it too far, and we need to stop them vocally. "c"onservatives will try never to move the line, and we need to make them budge.
It is not feasible to "just ignore" any large organization looking to move the line too far. It has to be actively challenged.