> But you better have the intellectual goods, and not just win arguments by default by suppressing dissent. / The latter is activism.
Isn't that what conservatives are actively, openly doing everywhere - suppressing dissent in libraries, universities, business (ESG, DEI, etc.), society, courts, political protest, media - suppressing liberal dissent?
It's an interesting question (and I upvoted you, though I'm the GP):
First, dissent is mostly about speech, IMHO, and DEI is only incidentally about speech. But let's look at it as an act that contests the status quo.
The point of DEI is to change the status quo, in which power, status, wealth, and freedom are distributed disproportionately to white males. A widespread belief (that I share, but I'm trying to examine this neutrally) is that it's largely due to racism and sexism that are historic, current, and systemic [0]. The whole point of DEI is to change that.
DEI has been embraced by many in power, making it an odd 'dissent', though maybe that's just a successful dissent - it's an generations-old dissent that people finally came around to. At the same time, it's still a dissent against the many status quo powers that are fighting against DEI.
[0] By 'systemic', I mean it's a product of a system that nobody quite chooses, but as long as everyone keeps operating it, it produces these results. For example, disproportionate hiring of white males could be because hiring is based on your personal network, which is based on who you work with, etc., and it becomes circular. People don't have to be seeking racist outcomes to produce them.
Conservatives have very little control or influence over libraries, universities, business HR programs, or the broad media (excluding some notable explicitly conservative outlets).
But yes, the ham fisted attempts by conservative politicians to combat purported progressive censorship...with conservative censorship...is equally bad.
Republican legislatures have been banning books from libraries. Libraries are government institutions. State universities are also government institutions. Florida has been forcing state schools, stifling the speech of the faculty on exactly what this article is about.
> Conservatives have very little control or influence over libraries
Conservatives have banned books from libraries across Florida and Texas (and other states)
> universities
Conservatives have compelled universities to reverse hiring decisions (at U. NC and one of the TX schools at least), end programs (e.g., Harvard's disinformation program), driven out university presidents (Harvard, Penn), and much, much more. In Florida they've banned certain ideas, they've undermined entire schools where they didn't like the politics.
> business HR programs
Conservatives have caused a huge pullback in DEI programs in the corporate world.
> broad media (excluding some notable explicitly conservative outlets).
That's a major exception: Fox News is by far the most popular news channel in the US; the Wall Street Journal is by far the dominant US publication for business.
> the ham fisted attempts by conservative politicians to combat purported progressive censorship
What does banning books and ideas from education have to do with combating censorship?
Isn't that what conservatives are actively, openly doing everywhere - suppressing dissent in libraries, universities, business (ESG, DEI, etc.), society, courts, political protest, media - suppressing liberal dissent?