Anarchist group at UT Austin threatens to dox incoming freshmen

Discussion in 'West Mall' started by Horn6721, Jun 21, 2019.

  1. Horn6721

    Horn6721 10,000+ Posts

    if they join a conservative campus clubs. :smh:
    "Earlier this month an anarchist group that consists of UT Austin students called the Autonomous Student Network shared a tweet threatening to dox students who considered joining the Young Conservatives of Texas and Turning Point USA during freshman orientation.

    “Hey #UT23! Do you wanna be famous? If you join YCT or Turning Point USA, you just might be. Your name and more could end up on an article like one of these,” the tweet said, linking to previous doxxing posts of conservative students at the school. “So be sure to make smart choices at #UTOrientation.”
    Last year the network released extensive personal information of pro-Brett Kavanaugh demonstrators at UT Austin, including their names, photos and contact information. It went so far as to post some of the phone numbers of the employers of students and encouraged its adherents to call them to get them fired.
    According to a UT Austin spokesman in January 2019, the Autonomous Student Network is “not any kind of registered student organization.” Nevertheless, it has partnerships with other clubs on campus and continues to call itself the “Autonomous Student Network-UT Austin” on its Facebook page."
    In the past, campus officials have reportedly taken some actions to investigate threats against conservative students. University Police reviewed the incident in October 2018 of harassment against conservative students, which helped shut down the network’s original Twitter account and appeared to have reduced its use of university facilities.

    Despite this response by UT Austin, UT Austin Law School alumnus and contributing editor to Law & Liberty, Mark Pulliam, remains skeptical. He tells The College Fix, “UT has taken strong action in the past to prevent non-registered groups from posting notices on campus, but the Autonomous Students’ flyers are ubiquitous on campus. There is clearly a double standard.”

    In reference to the doxxing threats from two weeks ago, he adds, “Unfortunately, I do not expect the UT administration to take any action. Under President Greg Fenves, UT has done little to protect the rights of conservative students on campus. When the YCT chapter’s rally in support of Brett Kavanaugh was disrupted by leftist protesters, Fenves was silent and the university’s belated response, by the Vice President for Diversity and Community Engagement, sympathized with the [leftist] protesters.”
    Anarchist group at UT Austin threatens to dox incoming freshmen if they join conservative campus clubs | The College Fix
     
    • poop poop x 1
  2. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez Beer Prophet

    None of this is surprising.
     
  3. TxnByBirth

    TxnByBirth 1,000+ Posts

    When these Autonomous Student Network people show themselves are they wearing brown shirts? It wouldn't surprise me.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  4. LongestHorn

    LongestHorn 2,500+ Posts

  5. Vol Horn 4 Life

    Vol Horn 4 Life Good Bye To All The Rest!

  6. Monahorns

    Monahorns 5,000+ Posts

    What Longest Horn doesn't tell you is that the Oregon governor signed a law or made a declaration or some other kind of official ordnance to forcibly drag the Republican Senators back to their assembly to force a vote.

    So those militia were there to protect the Republican Senators from physical violence and coercion.

    Don't be a whiny ***** if you are going to threaten violence. Something my grandma always said. Maybe.
     
  7. Horn6721

    Horn6721 10,000+ Posts

    LH knows his post has nothing to do with this thread so maybe he posted to the wrong thread by accident
    Or maybe he thought it showed the conservative students deserved to be doxxed ?

    Or maybe he is ignorant on how to post a new thread on a new subject matter.
     
  8. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez Beer Prophet

    He's posting it to show that Right wing people do bad things too.
     
  9. Horn6721

    Horn6721 10,000+ Posts

    Because known left wing protestors putting innocent students personal information out publically is exactly the same as what the GOP did in Oregon.:rolleyes1:
     
  10. Garmel

    Garmel 5,000+ Posts

    No one is going to accuse LongestHorn of being the sharpest tool in the shed.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  11. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez Beer Prophet

    They aren't, but we're too dumb to understand proportionality now.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  12. Vol Horn 4 Life

    Vol Horn 4 Life Good Bye To All The Rest!

    Every liberal I know thinks they are smarter than every other person in the room and behave that way too.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  13. Monahorns

    Monahorns 5,000+ Posts

    I don't think the GOP in Oregon did anything wrong. What else can a vanquished minority do but find loopholes in the law to work on? If you feel strongly about an issue and you have no political power, what do you? Turn over and take your screwing? Or do you find something you can do to hold off your perceived injustice? I know what I would do. It isn't roll over.
     
    • poop poop x 1
  14. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez Beer Prophet

    They did what Texas Democrats did in 2003 to stop redistricting. I'll admit I wasn't a fan of breaking quorum to stop a legislature from conducting business.

    You don't "take your screwing." You fight the legislation on the floor and vote against it. Yes, it may pass anyway. If it does, you make your case to the public about why it's bad and try to persuade them to oust the legislators who did something bad and put you in charge instead. Then you repeal their bad legislation. If breaking quorum and no-showing becomes ok, we basically won't have legislatures and deliberative bodies anymore.

    Just flip the parties and the issues. If Democrats did this to kill a major priority of ours that we had the votes to pass, we'd be righteous pissed.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    Last edited: Jun 24, 2019
  15. Sangre Naranjada

    Sangre Naranjada 10,000+ Posts

    I'm with you Deez. I remember when the Dems ran to Oklahoma to hide out, and I thought it was a chickenshit move then. The tactic is just as disagreeable to me now.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  16. Monahorns

    Monahorns 5,000+ Posts

    In other words take your screwing. I get it. The GOP has very little voice in Oregon and that voice will continue to dwindle as the majority continues rewriting the rules.

    Do you promise? Just kidding. I think the more reasonable outcome is that legislators in the majority learn not to bully the minority. Or another governing body comes into existence to provide whatever benefit the previous legislator had.

    I don't want legislators routinely leaving town to stop votes. I want government bodies to operate on good faith. But there are extreme situations that justify extreme measures. I didn't agree with the Texas Dems back in the day politically, but I understand why they did what they did. The redistricting still went through and is in place today.
     
  17. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez Beer Prophet

    The GOP's voice in Oregon is dwindling, because it's a toxic brand in that state as it is on most of the West Coast. Throwing a ****-fit and shutting down the Senate because it's not getting its way on a bill it doesn't like isn't going to change that. If the bill is so bad, then run against it.

    Nonsense. What someone perceives as "bullying" will simply shift, and we'll see this kind of fight come up again. It's dumb.

    So what's an "extreme measure?" To us, it might be some goofy environmental crackpot bill. To the Democrats, it could be a tax cut bill, a budget proposal, a religious freedom bill, a judicial nomination, or anything else they feel like crapping their pants over. It's a dumb precedent, because somebody craps their pants over just about everything.

    The redistricting still went through because John Whitmire decided he thought the quorum-busting was stupid and returned to the Capital.
     
  18. Monahorns

    Monahorns 5,000+ Posts

    You left out that a conservative viewpoint is toxic to Communists and Progressive Fascists regardless of the actions of the conservatives. Oregon is a State where Antifa violence is accepted as legitimate.

    Sure it will, but that isn't the point.

    Yes, it is subjective. Different people will react differently to bills. But that is kind of the point. It is one lever of political influence that minorities have. But it can also be used against them for things they want. They political system itself the fact that people want it to generally work well should provide some incentive to keep this from happening too much.

    And it hasn't occurred much for just the reasons I state. It still takes a significant amount of people to agree on principle and action in the face of a serious response from the other side. There is a political cost that they know they will have to pay. It also could result in them losing the next election if their voter base doesn't agree with the action.

    Your example below is evidence of what I am talking about.

     
  19. humahuma

    humahuma 1,000+ Posts

    Is anyone reaching out to the conservative campus clubs to offer assistance. I don’t want to bash some anarchist group heads or anything , but when they start messing with The University of Texas students I believe I can dust off my bat.
     
    • Like Like x 3
    • Funny Funny x 1
  20. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez Beer Prophet

    As a former statewide officer in the Young Conservatives of Texas from 2000 - 2006, I can tell you that they are almost surely in decent shape. For starters, at least in my day, gun ownership and CCL licensing in the organization was very common, even though I had neither. They don't just believe in the Second Amendment. They own guns, and though they aren't trigger happy punks, they don't mind using them to protect themselves. Nobody is going to physically attack them and live to regret it.

    Furthermore, the organization has a pretty large army of alumni who are lawyers (myself included) who are prepared to help legally if asked. That was true even in my day, and it's much more true now. They will be ok so long as they have the balls.
     
    • Like Like x 4
    • Funny Funny x 1
    Last edited: Jun 25, 2019
  21. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez Beer Prophet

    I understand what you're saying, and I don't think we're going to find agreement. I'm just telling you that you're not going to like when this is gets used on you for reasons you think are stupid but the other side considers "righteous." We have elected bodies for a reason, and this pretty much turns all that on its head and invites the consolidation of power in executive and judicial authorities that don't have to worry about this sort of thing.
     
  22. Monahorns

    Monahorns 5,000+ Posts

    C'mon Deez. Of course I am not going to like it when a group does something to prevent what I want done. That is politics. I also don't like it when voters elect politicians I don't like and pass bill into law I don't like. You're statement is true but unenlightening.

    Not sure I follow your logic. If constraining law makers is a bad thing and providing protection for political minorities is not important than we should get rid of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights anyway. A properly functioning Congress wouldn't result in Reps breaking quorum. It only happens with its function is already breaking down.

    Plus, Congress gives up its power willingly by how they write law anyway.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  23. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez Beer Prophet

    I'm not trying to enlighten. I'm just stating the obvious. If you've won elections and put your ideological allies into power, it would enrage you if a small band of sour grapes losers kept you from governing just because they're willing to quit on the job. And it would enrage you more than conventional or legitimate losing would. It isn't supposed to work that way. You can claim you'd just shrug it off, but respectfully, I don't believe you would if actually put in that situation, especially if we were talking about an issue you really cared about.

    Minorities are supposed to be protected by the Constitution through the judiciary, and that protection is supposed to be constrained by the terms of the Constitution. Minorities aren't supposed to have arbitrary veto power, and the majority is supposed to generally get its way within that constitutional framework.

    Also, the purpose of quorum requirements isn't to "protect minorities." It is actually to prevent a minority of legislators from governing in the absence of the majority. We don't want 20 House members calling their chamber into session and passing laws.

    What do you mean by "breaking down?" I don't see it that way. I see it as some members throwing a fit because they're desperate to stop something that their opponents have been given the power and yes, the mandate, to pass.

    They do it too much. I agree. However, if the people who win elections don't get to govern, you'll encourage much more delegation or even worse, unilateral executive actions. And of course, the public will be all for it since they've had their will subverted by the people who lost the election.
     
  24. Monahorns

    Monahorns 5,000+ Posts

    I just mean that one side gets to a point where they think they have no other way to stop something very bad from happening. Breaking down as in there is overwhelming power by one side and the other side thinks there is a gross abuse about to be voted in.

    In that case, throwing a fit is better than doing nothing.

    I already said I would be upset. The more I cared about the issue the more upset I would be. That doesn't mean I don't see the the utility of the tactic.

    Maybe I don't understand as well as you. I thought the Constitution, the law protects minorities. I guess if you have your rights abused then you can seek restitution in the courts. Is that what you mean?

    I have explained why I don't think it is arbitrary or will ever be common. But I agree that the majority will generally get it way. It gets its way the vast majority of the time. Not sure quorum breaking has ever kept a majority from doing what it wants eventually.

    Well all the politicians involved won elections with the intent to govern as their constituents see fit. So the minority group would be getting more of what it voted for. And maybe if a few of these instances happened and an agreement was negotiated, the people as a whole would feel better represented by a Congress who learns to compromise. I could see either way.
     

Share This Page