Academics and researchers who are taking a stand against the Sverigedemokrater clearly demonstrated how problematic it can be when political activism gets in the way of learning. While it is tempting to attribute this protest to Richard Jomshof, who on Wednesday night, and the dirty public relations campaign to generate media attention, they signed to the professionals.
The academics in the article in DN Debate that considers itself to uphold the equality of all people, the value does not seem to be averse to silence the voice that they think is wrong. They did not appear to be a stranger in order to deprive the students ‘ right to form their own opinion.
In an almost bizarre display of a lack of knowledge, justifies the author, his position on whether or not to invite The universities to, among other things, equate to our representatives, and even denies the holocaust. What is this ridiculous line of reasoning is based on is not clear, however, that demonstrates that it does vänsterorientering of a large part of the Swedish academic community.
the left-wing identity politics has taken root in many parts of the us academic community. A lecturer and scholar, in the united states, particularly those with conservative views – are often subjected to threats, acts of sabotage, and attempts at silencing. The hat, which is alleged to have been inflicted on such English scholars on social media sites as a result of their protest, therefore, is, unfortunately, something that their us counterparts often have to endure in the real world.
In the long run, this can lead to the basic principles of democracy are weakened, a protest movement against Richard Jomshof signal. The Swedish universities are able to and should not suffer the same fate. In Sweden, we value freedom of expression, the right to freedom of expression, and the fact that people like variety, even if it is possible to discuss how these principles are worked out in the past ten years, we are often faced with similar protests against the Richard Jomshof.
? The message could not be anything else other than to undermine and disqualify the students and their ability to analyze and evaluate the content of Richard’s talk.
The scholars ‘ arguments, it is clear that the politicians have enough space in which to advocate its policies through the media and its many platforms. This is the correct view, however, it was not the political issues that Richard talked about. Scholars ‘ arguments, therefore, on the ovetskapen of what the lecture is actually dealt with, and, therefore, the idea that this is basically the only way for these graduates to be seen and heard in the media.
No, the scholars ‘ arguments are simply not. It is not worthy of the English academic community, the democracy, or the right to acquire knowledge. If you put in addition to their analysis under the microscope shows skenheligheten in a very public way. They claim, among other things, to lecture, to threaten academic freedom and, in addition, they have the audacity to imply that we would want to have a say in what kind of ”bodies” that should be permitted or prohibited at the university. It is quite obvious that this is exactly the kind of influence that the graduates in question pursue, then, is a sverigedemokratisk the ”body” is considered to be problematic and therefore undesirable.
<
