Are there BNP-symathetic professional historians in Britain?
Les Cargill
If so, how is this? There's no First Amendment there.
--
Les Cargill
William Black
>
> If so, how is this? There's no First Amendment there.
That doesn't mean there isn't the right to free speech.
As far as I'm aware there is no prohibition on joining any political
party of any beliefs in the UK unless you're some sort of government
servant.
The group of government servants not permitted membership of extremist
political parties is limited.
--
William Black
"Any number under six"
The answer given by Englishman Richard Peeke when asked by the Duke of
Medina Sidonia how many Spanish sword and buckler men he could beat
single handed with a quarterstaff.
Les Cargill
> Les Cargill wrote:
>>
>> If so, how is this? There's no First Amendment there.
>
> That doesn't mean there isn't the right to free speech.
>
Well, there's a larger question then - how does that work?
By legal precedent? And taking the Larry Summers case in mind,
we don't have an absolute right to free speech, either, well
short of yelling "fire" in a crowded theater.
Wouldn't that be equivalent to being a mathematician
that does not hold to Cantor's Diagonalization, or
a physicist that thinks relativity is just wrong?
Please note that there are/were "finitist" mathematicians ( don't
you wish you could have used *that* in caclulus, eh ). Dunno
about relativity-denier phsyicists.
As background, I've encountered someone who holds that Simon
Schama is just plain full of it. He leans BNP if he's not
one in actuality, and claims he's had professors be critical of
Schama . My jaw dropped. Schama's not just a historian, but
also an *art* historian, with much emphasis on joining
the two.
The case against racism isn't that it's unkulturny, it is
that it is incorrect, books like "The Bell Curve" to the
side.
> As far as I'm aware there is no prohibition on joining any political
> party of any beliefs in the UK unless you're some sort of government
> servant.
>
But this one would seem to be a serious *professional* liability. I
can't imagine they'd ever survive peer review if they publish
like that.... Anglo-Saxon history is good stuff, but there's a
much larger story...
> The group of government servants not permitted membership of extremist
> political parties is limited.
>
>
Huh. How congruent is this with security clearances, the like? The
"lifestyle/polygraph" class of clearance in the US is highly invasive.
And as the case of Oppenheimer shows, this is abused in the US.
--
Les Cargill
William Black
> William Black wrote:
> Wouldn't that be equivalent to being a mathematician
> that does not hold to Cantor's Diagonalization, or
> a physicist that thinks relativity is just wrong?
As in the USA senior university staff in the UK have tenure.
They can't be dismissed for publishing controversial stuff.
> As background, I've encountered someone who holds that Simon
> Schama is just plain full of it. He leans BNP if he's not
> one in actuality, and claims he's had professors be critical of
> Schama . My jaw dropped. Schama's not just a historian, but
> also an *art* historian, with much emphasis on joining
> the two.
More to the point about Professor Sharma is that he's Jewish and
therefore not acceptable to the loony tune racists of the BNP.
>> As far as I'm aware there is no prohibition on joining any political
>> party of any beliefs in the UK unless you're some sort of government
>> servant.
>>
>
> But this one would seem to be a serious *professional* liability. I
> can't imagine they'd ever survive peer review if they publish
> like that.... Anglo-Saxon history is good stuff, but there's a
> much larger story...
Peer review only covers publication in the professional press.
If they can get it published they can usually say anything they want.
The option to sue them remains.
>> The group of government servants not permitted membership of extremist
>> political parties is limited.
>>
>>
>
> Huh. How congruent is this with security clearances, the like? The
> "lifestyle/polygraph" class of clearance in the US is highly invasive.
I have no idea.
I imagine the intelligence services and parts of the armed forces need
some sort of security clearance, but the polygraph is not used in the UK.
Wikipedia has some stuff:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classified_information_in_the_United_Kingdom#Security_clearance
But I have no idea how accurate it all is.
I know that police officers may not join the BNP or other extremist parties.
Les Cargill
> Les Cargill wrote:
>> William Black wrote:
>
>
>> Wouldn't that be equivalent to being a mathematician
>> that does not hold to Cantor's Diagonalization, or
>> a physicist that thinks relativity is just wrong?
>
> As in the USA senior university staff in the UK have tenure.
>
> They can't be dismissed for publishing controversial stuff.
>
>
No, I understand. I still think this person was
lying out and out.
>> As background, I've encountered someone who holds that Simon
>> Schama is just plain full of it. He leans BNP if he's not
>> one in actuality, and claims he's had professors be critical of
>> Schama . My jaw dropped. Schama's not just a historian, but
>> also an *art* historian, with much emphasis on joining
>> the two.
>
> More to the point about Professor Sharma is that he's Jewish and
> therefore not acceptable to the loony tune racists of the BNP.
>
That was my thought, yes.
>>> As far as I'm aware there is no prohibition on joining any political
>>> party of any beliefs in the UK unless you're some sort of government
>>> servant.
>>>
>>
>> But this one would seem to be a serious *professional* liability. I
>> can't imagine they'd ever survive peer review if they publish
>> like that.... Anglo-Saxon history is good stuff, but there's a
>> much larger story...
>
> Peer review only covers publication in the professional press.
>
> If they can get it published they can usually say anything they want.
>
> The option to sue them remains.
>
>>> The group of government servants not permitted membership of
>>> extremist political parties is limited.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Huh. How congruent is this with security clearances, the like? The
>> "lifestyle/polygraph" class of clearance in the US is highly invasive.
>
> I have no idea.
>
> I imagine the intelligence services and parts of the armed forces need
> some sort of security clearance, but the polygraph is not used in the UK.
>
> Wikipedia has some stuff:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classified_information_in_the_United_Kingdom#Security_clearance
>
>
Interesting.
> But I have no idea how accurate it all is.
>
> I know that police officers may not join the BNP or other extremist
> parties.
>
Which makes sense.
--
Les Cargill