Hello and welcome back to The Dissent!
We return to the contentious issue that is Andrew Tate, and address some of the criticisms on our coverage of the topic in our last episode. As part of this, we discussed the difference between 'advocating' for something and 'promoting' it, the reasonable limits of freedom of speech and the problems with censorship. This segued into a discussion about Elon Musk's Twitter takeover, and the precarious future of the platform.
Our main discussion was around a recent US Supreme Court case(s), SFFA v Harvard and University of North Carolina. We discuss whether race-based affirmative action is necessary, or an
unconscionable application of racist discrimination on 'ethical' grounds. As part of this, we looked at the potential alternatives to this system, such as a broader class or opportunity based programme.
We then had a brief opportunity to discuss a 'little' bit of public law - namely, whether the UK constitution in it's current form is desirable, given the recent Tory leadership debacle.
All this and more from your devoted, irreverent legal pundits - Gans and Higgins.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Instagram: @thedissentpod
Twitter: @poddissent
Intro/Outro music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSZwU782Dz0
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timestamps!
00:00 Intro
03:57 Andrew Tate (again)
28:49 Twitter
38:05 Affirmative action: anti-racist racism?
1:23:00 The merits of the UK constitution
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
