So someone emailed us the other day with an idea: The Georgetown Veto
He's a legal eagle type and mentioned something called "jury nullification," which is basically when a jury says screw the law. It happens in cases where the jury believes the defendant is technically guilty, under the law, but believes the law invalid because it is unjust, so the jury ignores it.
He sent us a link.
Why do we bring this up?
Because there's a lot at Georgetown that liberals and social justice warriors want to force you to do, but which in reality, you can ignore. The truth is there are many things you don't have to comply with, despite the claims of those in the administration, or some student employee like an R.A. This includes some of the b.s. that occurs during NSO or any type of meeting you're told is mandatory, but isn't related to one of your scheduled classes.
In fact, it also applies to GUPD.
That said, we like GUPD and think they're a bunch of hardworking, dedicated, and friendly people who exist to keep everyone safe, and in our view aren't given the praise or compensation they deserve, so there is no point in not cooperating with them unless they go after something they shouldn't, like a free speech issue.
If they do, stand up to them and get it on video. Don't behave like the womyn at H*yas for Abortion who apparently aren't familiar with the Constitution and who easily cave like little children when attempting to exercise their free speech rights on public property.
Now Georgetown may certainly try and give you a little punishment for not playing the social justice warrior game. Maybe an essay to write or a fine. Not a big deal, comply if you want, but remember, you can always refuse. Ultimately it will come down to a test of wills, and we're thinking there is a good chance your R.A. or some admin will give it up and move over to someone else if you show you can't be easily bullied.
Our advice doesn't apply if you get caught drinking underage, doing drugs, or committing some other crime. With those offenses you deserve the punishment and hopefully you'll learn something (like immediately putting your beer down on the floor and stepping away from it the minute GUPD or a DC cop appears at the door; remember, no proof you've been drinking means no penalty; you can't be punished for simply being at a party where alcohol is served any more than you can be punished for going to the The Tombs for lunch).
A perfect example of what we mean is what happened last year when CSE, which is led by Erica Cohen Derr, who has a history of attempting to control student speech, tried to stifle student speech. She got one of her subordinates, who was actually quite helpful originally in setting the event up, to try strong-arming the College Republicans over a video of the Christina Hoff Sommers speech which appeared on YouTube and had some fragile feminist protesters in it who complained because they came off looking stupid.
The CRs didn't capitulate and national press attention exposed the issue to CSE's and Erica's everlasting shame. This action was one of two last semester that inspired TGA's reboot. You can thank both Derr and the race hustlers who took down Dylan, because without them, we wouldn't be here right now.
CSE has been silent on the topic since and never followed through on their threat because they were stood up to by courageous students and the Clare Boothe Luce Policy Institute, which helped set up the speech. In a certain sense, both the CRs and CBLPI exercised their "veto" power and nullified CSE's attempt to suppress the video.
This is something us Hoyas should do more often.
The veto has applications beyond dealing with the administration.
In class, speak out and don't be afraid when some professional victim in the identity group mafia tries to hijack the conversation and make everyone conform to their left-wing social justice warrior line of thinking. They'll try to shame and silence you, but don't let them. Ask hard questions and expose the fallacies and hypocrisies in their arguments. Continue to do the same in conversations with these same sort of people, whether at Leo's or The Tombs.
Trust us, they could use the real-talk and a bit of truth in their lives. You'll be doing them a service and putting them on notice they don't control campus debate and their bullying tactics are no longer effective.
Don't get sucked in to playing or complying with their SJW and left-wing liberal games. If one of them asks you to sign a silly petition, tell them no. Share on Facebook an article which shows why they're wrong and exposes their intellectual fascism and craziness.
If you really want to anger them, share one of our articles. You're always free to say:
"I don't agree with everything in TGA, but they do bring up some points worth discussing."
In fact, that might be a great standard disclaimer for everyone to use every time they share one of our posts on FB. Make it a meme. It lets you put the ideas out there and show some support without being tied to us.
Also, feel free to attend any and all left-wing liberal social justice warrior speaker events so you can ask uncomfortable questions and argue with them. Next time there is a trivial protest, hold up a sign making fun of both it and protesters.
If they call you a racist, like they've called us, tell them they have no clue what that word means and they only make it harder for real victims of racism because they've cheapened the value of that word. Same with sexist, homophobic, and all the other -ists and -ics. Don't let them get away with throwing those words out there unsupported.
If you stand up to them, then like all bullies, they'll back down and bother someone else who isn't as brave. You'll also help inspire others who have remained silent. We've seen that happen this semester already in the big response TGA received when we started, and then the decision by SJWs to hit other targets when they knew we couldn't be bullied. If they know they can't cower libertarians or conservatives or those in the middle, then there's a good chance they'll keep going after one of their own like they did last semester with Dylan. And that's what we want: for them to eat their own.
Here's the thing: you've already made it to the Hilltop. And Georgetown can't suspend or expel you without just cause. Telling someone to bugger off over you not complying with some left-wing liberal b.s. isn't sufficient for them to withhold your degree or kick you out.
The administration might try and play you, saying you won't graduate while tossing out a few more threats, but in the end there is a better-than-average chance they'll let it go.
The bureaucrats in Healy, CSE, and elsewhere won't risk a lawsuit and don't want the press attention that will result. You've paid tons of money and done what you need to do to get your degree. They'll let you leave with it.
Fighting you also takes away an administrator's time, energy, and attention, which they would surely like to focus on other matters. And we suspect they, along with most people, know that most of what they do is just to keep certain professional victims in the identity group mafia happy and maintain their ability to control you.
The real problem will be you challenging them and questioning their authority, not anything you did. That's the thing about petty bureaucrats and social justice warriors, it's the not violation, but the refusal to submit to their authority that really bothers them.
The big test will come starting next year with the "Diversity" Requirement which was foisted upon students by a bunch of professional victims and grievance industry professors who are trying to perpetuate the diversity scam and who have closed minds and little conception of what it means to have true diversity (diversity of thought) in a university environment.
Some brave student(s) in future classes will need to stand up and say no. They'll need to make it to Spring their senior year without having taken some grievance studies course, and then apply for graduation.
And when a Dean or the Registrar tells someone: "But you didn't take Gay Latin Poets of the 1950s or Black Feminism, so you can't graduate," that person needs to respond: "You're right, I didn't take two worthless grievance industry courses, and I'm not going to either."
We'll support them. Will you?
Of course, there is an easier way for the University to handle this matter and avoid the controversy, which we really hope our successors inflame next year if the administration doesn't fix the problem.
It's in Healy's interest to do so if they want to avoid a ton of ill will from students who will become alumni who refuse to donate to alma mater and who will otherwise be hostile to Georgetown and have their experiences ruined because they were forced to waste over 15K and a heck of a lot of time on having to take courses they neither want nor need, and which only exist to provide jobs for left-wing liberal professors in the grievance studies and make professional victims in the identity group mafia happy.
In fact, when Georgetown sends out future fundraising appeals, the majority can write back and say take it out of that $15K I spent on two b.s. diversity requirement classes I was forced to take when I was a junior.
But there is an easier way. The University can decide not to enforce the diversity requirement and just make it strongly recommended, or better yet, get rid of it all together.
Though there is another option: watering it down.
Make it so that no Georgetown student has to take courses they don't want to fulfill this stupid requirement. Expand the available number of course offerings that fulfill it to such a degree the requirement becomes meaningless and a requirement in name only.
Here's the truth: the left-wing liberal social justice warriors and identity group mafia contingent at Georgetown want to keep the number of courses students can take to fulfill the requirement as small as possible so students are corralled into only those courses promoting their ideologically-driven, politically-correct group-think. A battle is going right now over the number of "approved" courses, which we remind everyone, has been kept secret from the studentry and has never been released.
The original number of courses was around 80, then after faculty discussion it shot to over 200 (a good thing), then that number was brought back down again in the struggle between sane professors and administrators who don't believe in a politicized curriculum, and those liberals in Women's Studies, Sociology, the English Department, the Justice and Peace program, and African American Studies, who want the course offerings limited to only their classes since fewer and fewer students are choosing to waste time in those programs and departments.
Because Georgetown is a private University, the administration can impose whatever course requirements it wants on students, whether they make sense or not. But students have a way to respond. This includes not playing the game, arguing and making life difficult for these administrators and certain professors, telling the University you're not going to donate after graduation, and engaging in activism meant to make the diversity requirement meaningless or eliminate it entirely. It also includes testing how committed they are to the requirement by making it to senior year with out having fulfilled it.
But the best option is to actively lobby and pressure the administration NOW to expand the number of course offerings. That way they can save face (or is it be two-faced?) by saying they have the "diversity" requirement implemented, thereby giving the professional victims in the identity group mafia some of what they want, while ensuring no student is harmed and coerced out of 15K by being forced to take a bunch of left-wing courses taught by politicized professors which will add nothing of value to their educational experience, but will actually detract from it and embitter them towards Georgetown.
We've already seen how weak President DeGioia is and how easily he'll cave to a couple dozen people occupying the area where his secretary sits.
Who says he won't again if another group attempts something similar?