– Each Paragraph should be in one word doc. they are 6 questions

1- Now that you know the name for it, when have you read or heard examples of doublespeak? Over the next few days, jot down examples of doublespeak that you recall or that you read and hear — from politicians or news commentators; in the lease for your dwelling or your car; in advertising and catalogs; from bosses, teachers, or other figures of authority; in overheard conversations.

2-Write a journal response to Divakaruni’s argument against legislation that bans goods produced by forced or indentured child laborers. Do you basically agree or disagree with the author? Why?

3-How do you feel about illegal immigrants? Are they criminals who should be punished? victims of circumstance who should be helped? something in between? In your journal, explore your thoughts on illegal immigration. Why do you feel as you do?

4- “This is all strong evidence of a culture in which students expect to be coddled and protected instead of exposed to different ideas or views, or even to things that may make them uncomfortable — which used to be an important part of education and personal growth at the university level,” Hemphill writes in paragraph 5. How do you respond to this characterization? Write in your journal about your thoughts on higher education — not necessarily what you see as the ideal learning environment, but rather why you think people go to college in the first place. What is the purpose of a college education? What do students hope to gain? What do they give up? What kinds of risks are they taking? To what extent is a college degree necessary for a happy, successful life? Base your entry on your observations and experiences.

5- What potential threat or threats in your life most give you “the jitters”? Write a journal entry exploring your specific worries.

6-In your journal, respond to Thoreau’s contention that we should all simplify our existence and become attuned to nature for the sake of leading more purposeful lives. How persuaded are you by his argument? Do you agree that forsaking the world of business and commerce, for instance, could make you a happier person, or do you think meaningful work (or religion, or building relationships, or something else) is the purpose of living? Why do you feel the way you do?

* last thing

– I want you to write 2-3 paragraphs(free writing) about this story, telling that this is my favorite story and why it is my favorite story. it should be in one word doc. does not have to be MLA format.

– this story is also for question number 4 so it might help.

– you can just scan the story.

What Happened to Free Speech on College Campuses?

1- Universities used to be bastions of free speech and the flow of ideas. Students passionately fought for their right to not be silenced in regards to the most controversial of issues. Now, it seems as if the opposite is occurring: Students in general are in favor of limiting speech and establishing safe spaces on campuses, and many universities are actively discouraging free speech through their policies. This isn’t progressive; this is regressive and isn’t suitable at the university level, where students are supposed to be challenged by different views and ideas to foster critical thinking.

2-In 1964, the Free Speech Movement was founded at the University of California, Berkeley. Students protested a ban on on-campus political activities, such as campaigning, gathering signatures, and handing out literature. They also demanded that their rights to free speech and academic freedom be recognized. Thousands of students had witnessed Jack Weinberg being arrested for passing out civil rights literature on campus. As they “spontaneously chanted ‘let him go,’ ” reports NPR correspondent Richard Gonzales, “the Free Speech Movement was ignited.” That December, “a massive sit-in” resulted in the arrest of eight hundred students: Students were “pushed down the stairs, beat and kicked” by police (Gonzales). Several sit-ins and protests followed, with thousands of students from different political backgrounds, socialist to republican, participating with the unified goal of forever changing student activism on college campuses. Thanks to these passionate students, the movement was victorious and the university consequently ended all bans on political activity and free speech.

3-Today, however, many colleges and universities are once again barring students from exercising free speech rights through policies that require permission to use them, in forms such as tabling or distributing literature on campus. Sometimes those rights are limited to “free speech zones,” which are designated areas on campuses where students don’t need permission to exercise their First Amendment rights. Cliff Maroney, Jr., a student activist and the director of Young Americans for Liberty, offers several examples:

When rolling an inflated free-speech ball around campus, students at the University of Delaware were halted by campus police for their activities. A Young Americans for Liberty leader at Fairmont State University in West Virginia was confronted by security when he was attempting to speak with other students about his beliefs. A man at Clemson University was stopped from praying on campus because he was outside of the free-speech zone. And a student at Blinn College … [was told to] seek special permission to advocate for self-defense.

Universities have also instituted policies that ban certain types of speech, such as language that can be deemed discriminatory or offensive. However, these policies are often vague about what exactly falls under those categories. Anything a person might say can be taken as offensive by some, therefore making it dangerous for students to say anything controversial or of bad taste in the slightest.

4-Unfortunately, it seems that most college students aren’t exactly opposed to these anti-speech policies. In fact, “a large percentage of millennials … want the government to restrict certain types of speech that is protected by the First Amendment [and a] whopping forty percent of millennials think the government should be able to punish speech that is offensive to minority groups” (Barrows). Why have students, who once largely supported their right to speak about the most controversial topics, changed their minds? A new culture of hypersensitivity to anything deemed offensive — whether it be a joke taken out of context; clothing, hair, or costumes that may not be from a student’s own culture; or views that are not part of the mainstream — is to blame for students allowing these policies to take place. Anti-free speech policies have further inhibited students from hearing points of view that are different from their own. They have helped make students more sensitive, feeling “triggered” when they simply hear something they don’t like or agree with. They have made students oppose free speech and demand further protections and safe spaces from words or behaviors they feel are offensive. As journalist Susan Milligan describes it, “the buzzwords of the antiwar students of the ’60s — free speech, free love, and down with the ‘Establishment’ — have been replaced by phrases that make contemporary college life sound like a war zone. Safe spaces. Trigger warnings. Cultural appropriation.”

5- Don’t believe it? “Then why,” as the San Diego Union-Tribune editorial board asks,

… did a feminist professor’s essay about campus hypersensitivity lead to Northwestern graduate students trying to get the university punished …? Why are the University of California faculty told that statements such as “I believe the most qualified person should get the job” is a potentially traumatizing microaggression? Why are students on college campuses across America complaining about having to read novels with themes that “trigger” student discomfort — such as the violence and misogyny in F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby? Why are Harvard law students urging professors not to teach about laws relating to sexual violence and to not even use the word “violate”? (“Why”)

This is all strong evidence of a culture in which students expect to be coddled and protected instead of exposed to different ideas or views, or even to things that may make them uncomfortable — which used to be an important part of education and personal growth at the university level.

6- Although this is a trend among most universities across the nation, not all are conforming to the banning of speech and the establishment of safe spaces and trigger warnings. John Ellison, dean of students at The University of Chicago, wrote a welcome letter to members of the class of 2020 that went against college political correctness: “Our commitment to academic freedom means that we do not support so-called trigger warnings, we do not cancel invited speakers because their topics might prove controversial, and we do not condone the creation of intellectual ‘safe spaces’ where individuals can retreat from ideas and perspectives at odds with their own,” he explained (qtd. in Pérez-Peña). Even President Obama did not condone this supposedly “progressive” movement. In a 2016 commencement speech he gave at Howard University, he condemned students trying to get universities to disinvite speakers with different views, advising them not to shut people out no matter how much they may disagree with them: “There’s been a trend around the country of trying to get colleges to disinvite speakers with a different point of view, or disrupt a politician’s rally,” he commented. “Don’t do that — no matter how ridiculous or offensive you might find the things that come out of their mouths” (qtd. in Pérez-Peña).

7- Because of anti-speech policies, safe spaces, and trigger warnings, college students are not being prepared for the rigors and realities of the real world. The real world doesn’t provide safe spaces or protections against offense. Universities are supposed to foster an environment that accepts the diversity of ideas and views so that students can become more aware of, not more sensitive to, different beliefs and so that they can understand why others hold them. Students should be able to engage in respectful discussion about controversial topics, instead of thinking they have the right to silence others if they don’t agree with them. Students need to be able to question their own beliefs as well. All of this can sometimes lead to discomfort or anger, but in the end it fosters critical thinking and understanding.

8- Universities, especially public, taxpayer-funded ones, should have no right to limit free speech or discourage ways of thinking that are not in line with the “status quo.” They also should not be establishing safe spaces and trigger warnings to keep students “safe” from ideas that offend them. Doing so not only deprives students of the well-rounded education they deserve, but it also lets the future leaders of our nation think that it is acceptable to censor speech they don’t like and, ultimately, to infringe on the Constitution and the core values our country was founded on. Continuing this way is not only a threat to the First Amendment, but to democracy itself.

– any questions let me know, thank you