I can also hold a position that it is irresponsible. If you wish to refer to it as “mob” and “moral panic” you can. But I don’t see the need.

I can also hold a position that it is irresponsible.

If you wish to refer to it as “mob” and “moral panic” you can. But I don’t see the need.

* basic academic norms of liberalism

* academic freedom

* free speech

* accusations are worthless

* don’t overturn ENTIRE HERITAGE of western liberal institutions

* spirit of the federalists

* think about precedent

* refer to [something / someone] as a mob

These are your bullet points as best I can extract them.

I would suggest that the moral panic is coming from authors such as the one from this piece.

Is it possible that the reduction in the scope of the lecture in a particular case might actually be justifiable in this case?

Or is it always an example of some kind of mob mentality?

Must it always be a case of mob mentality?

—