I think it’s important that genuine debate is allowed - I don’t consider hate to be a genuine debate.
...
Re: the article. I do think there should be more opportunity for discussion from both sides - but if the discussion is not conducted in a respectful manner then it’s fairly useless
I think this really sums it up for me. Everyone is absolutely entitled to their opinions, however I love the quote "I will respect your opinion unless your opinion disprespects someone's existence". I think this is one of the important things about safe spaces, which provide spaces for anyone who
feel like they are being judged or even attacked for who they are, regardless of the intentions of such opinions. I don't think it's a matter of shielding people from the real world, I think it's a matter of allowing people to feel safe and supported for as long as possible, with support they may not get once they leave uni. Lsjnzy13 raises an interesting point though, that it can cause people to disengage from debate, causing more damage when they leave the relative shelter of these spaces. Maybe then the discussion should be about instead of just getting rid of safe spaces altogether, how to allow people to feel safe and supported while still allowing exposure to a range of other opinions? I guess that's another issue though.
I think it is damaging in any sort of debate when it becomes an "us vs them" situation, which can occur with the "left" vs "right", which I think just promotes stereotypes surrounding the views of these political ideologies. For example this quote from the article:
"Support Israel? You are a conservative troglodyte who supports the murder of children. Have religious beliefs? You are an anti-intellectual homophobe. Have a balanced view of European history and post-colonial Australia? You are a jingoistic imperialist with racist tendencies.
This shows the stereotypes against right wing opinions, and I think there are similar stereotypes that are applied to left wing opinions. So I think one of the most important things in debate is being open to accepting the
range of different political opinions, and genuinely listening to all opinions and the reasons behind them. It is so important not to become cemented in your views and defending them at all costs, which is extremely difficult and something I'll admit I am still trying to practice myself. This is what creates genuine "intellectual" debate, rather than just people trying to speak their own opinions the loudest.
I also felt that in the article it was almost posing the situation in universities as "international students vs Australia". Obviously this is an exaggeration, and I think the concerns are very valid surrounding changing the curriculum to suit the opinions of only one group, such as Chinese students. However I think we also need to look at the benefits of having international students, as they can be the very people that stimulate new types of interllectual debate. This is complex and probably not something I know enough about to discuss properly.
Definietly agree though with all the sentiments expressed by others that debate must always be respectful, otherwise it is extremely counterproductive. Sorry for the really long post, hopefully I am also being respectful and contributing to worthwhile discussion