Brexit: Now What? Part IV

Status
Not open for further replies.
Presumably, some of the academics teaching the Brexit related material would have been pro leave. So you can hardly say the MP was trying to compile some kind of 'hit list'.
 
ceptimus said:
Presumably, some of the academics teaching the Brexit related material would have been pro leave. So you can hardly say the MP was trying to compile some kind of 'hit list'.
Click to expand...
I can't be bothered to read the last half-a-dozen posts. Did any of them suggest that it was some kind of hit list?
 
3point14 said:
She may have been an evil witch-queen from hell but at least she was a competent evil witch queen from hell.
Click to expand...

.....until power went to her head and she went rather bonkers towards the end of her "reign" - at least IMO
 
Rat said:
Fair enough. That's not what I see it as, and I suspect it was just a rhetorical overextension. So what was its purpose?
Click to expand...
I don't see anything wrong with an MP trying to find out what is being taught by universities and with what, if any, bias.

If the letter had asked for information about what courses were being taught, and by whom, about alternative medicine with particular regard to homeopathy, then I suspect posters here would be sympathetic.

The problem is that everyone on both sides of the debate assumes that the universities are hotbeds of lefty-leaning 100% pro-remain sentiment, and the pro-remain side don't want that situation looked into or altered.
 
ceptimus said:
I don't see anything wrong with an MP trying to find out what is being taught by universities and with what, if any, bias.

<snip>
Click to expand...


He wasn't asking what was taught. He was asking who was teaching it.

All of which he could have gleaned from publicly available sources.

Aside from letting it be known that he was making a point of singling them out, what other purpose could such a letter have accomplished?
 
What's the problem with letting them know that he was trying to single them out? If they're teaching a political subject in an obviously biassed way they ought to be prepared, at least, to stand up and admit such.
 
ceptimus said:
What's the problem with letting them know that he was trying to single them out? If they're teaching a political subject in an obviously biassed way they ought to be prepared, at least, to stand up and admit such.
Click to expand...

Oh deary me.
 
ceptimus said:
What's the problem with letting them know that he was trying to single them out? If they're teaching a political subject in an obviously biassed way they ought to be prepared, at least, to stand up and admit such.
Click to expand...


How, exactly, would the letter he sent inform him about how they were teaching the subject?

What reason do you have to believe "they" were teaching it in a biassed way, much less an "obvious" one?

How would the letter he sent help him distinguish "them" from the ones who were teaching it in whatever fashion would presumably be acceptable?

And who gets to decide which is which?
 
quadraginta said:
How, exactly, would the letter he sent inform him about how they were teaching the subject?
Click to expand...
It wouldn't
What reason do you have to believe "they" were teaching it in a biassed way, much less an "obvious" one?
Click to expand...
I don't. The assumption on most of the websites and comments where I've read about this is that academics are overwhelmingly pro-remain. But I don't know how that fact or opinion was arrived at. The over-reaction of the academics to a fairly mild letter adds to the suspicion that they might have something to hide.

How would the letter he sent help him distinguish "them" from the ones who were teaching it in whatever fashion would presumably be acceptable?
Click to expand...
I don't think it would. If he had received sufficient replies to his letter, I suppose he could then have embarked on further research to try to discover how the lecturers had taught the subject and whether or not they'd covered it in a fair and balanced way.

And who gets to decide which is which?
Click to expand...
How does anyone ever decide what is fair and balanced? The best you can hope for when there is wide disagreement on a topic is that both sides of the argument are presented. There's nothing to stop a lecturer (or anyone) making their own opinion on the subject known, but that opinion shouldn't be presented as fact.
 
Last edited:
ceptimus said:
It wouldn't
I don't. The assumption on most of the websites and comments where I've read about this is that academics are overwhelmingly pro-remain. But I don't know how that fact or opinion was arrived at. The over-reaction of the academics to a fairly mild letter adds to the suspicion that they might have something to hide.

I don't think it would. If he had received sufficient replies to his letter, I suppose he could then have embarked on further research to try to discover how the lecturers had taught the subject and whether or not they'd covered it in a fair and balanced way.

And who gets to decide which is which?
Click to expand...
[/QUOTE]

And who made this Tory whip the arbiter of what constitutes a fair and balanced way to teach European Studies? What business is it of his anyway, surely if there's a problem it would be the job of the Education Secretary to deal with it.
 
ceptimus said:
It wouldn't
I don't. The assumption on most of the websites and comments where I've read about this is that academics are overwhelmingly pro-remain. But I don't know how that fact or opinion was arrived at. The over-reaction of the academics to a fairly mild letter adds to the suspicion that they might have something to hide.

<snip>
Click to expand...


Why is it an over-reaction?

What legitimate purpose could such a letter serve?

They are reacting to a transparent, scatter-shot, ham-fisted attempt at intimidation.
 
I don't see why any MP, or for that matter anyone - whether an MP or not - should be prevented from making such an inquiry.

Obviously this particular MP is pro-leave, and his intent was probably to try to expose the lecturers as teaching what he believes to be biassed pro-remain propaganda. I don't believe his excuse that he was trying to gather information for a book.

I've no illusions about his motivations. What I'm interested in is how the remain-supporting politicians and the left wing media have piled on to this story, and their self-righteous belief and assertion that what he did was dishonest or wrong in some way.
 
quadraginta said:
Why is it an over-reaction?

[snip]

They are reacting to a transparent, scatter-shot, ham-fisted attempt at intimidation.
Click to expand...

Why is it intimidation for an MP to attempt to reveal what he believes to be biassed teaching in our universities? Like I said earlier, if the subject matter had been alternative medicine and homeopathy, I suspect that posters on this forum would be applauding the MP's attempt to reveal such teaching. In fact we don't need to have a hypothetical alternative medicine example as the real example of biassed teaching in faith schools regularly crops up.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom