Student Activists at Duke Want ‘Consequences’ for Acts of Hate and Bias
“A group calling itself the “People’s State of the University”
This is funny. Just last month, student activists at Duke were complaining about consequences for themselves.
Campus Reform reports:
Duke activists want ‘consequences’ for acts of hate, bias
Following two racially charged incidents, students are now calling on Duke University to “create and enforce a standardized set of consequences for acts of hate & bias on campus.”
Some undergraduate students are even threatening to withhold donations until the school adopts a policy that satisfies their expectations, which were recently dashed when Vice President of Student Affairs Larry Moneta announced that Duke would not punish a student for an “offensive and racist” social media post because it did not violate school policy.
“Freedom of expression protects the oppressed far more than the oppressors,” Moneta later tweeted, further incensing the protesters.
A group calling itself the “People’s State of the University” delivered a petition Monday to Moneta and President Vincent Price, which outlines what the “standardized sets of consequences” would look like.
“The Duke Community Standard should be expanded to include provisions on what is ideal and acceptable behavior in the Duke community, specifically regarding cases of hate and bias,” the petition states, suggesting that the consequences should be similar to those for consuming alcohol, academic dishonesty, and drug use.
According to the Duke Community Standard, punishments for academic dishonesty, at the most severe extent, can lead to suspension and expulsion.
“These incidents CANNOT continue to happen, threatening the safety and livelihood of black students and students of color on our campus,” reads the petition.
![](https://c1.legalinsurrection.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/subscribe-ad.jpg)
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
“…what is ideal and acceptable behavior in the Duke community, specifically regarding cases of hate and bias”
Once again I ask…who gets to decide what is “hate” and “bias”, and are there objective standards to determine the level of “hate” and “bias” displayed by the perpetrator(s)?
The ones making the decisions will be those in the grievance groups that snivel the loudest.
They aren’t going to like the Karma boomerang.