We were going to stew here on what occured yesterday at UT regarding the YCT, but we've found others who say it just as well as we could.

Okay, honestly, we're lazy.

(after the jump)

After finding out that there was a protest to what had (or had not?) been originally planned as far as the "immigrant hunt" goes, we read this quote in the Statesman from the YCT head,

"I would have to ask in what way was the event dehumanizing. As far as I can see, the UNT event was simply trying to display their political view of the immigration issue", (full story, thanks BOR)

and we were a bit stunned to silence. Luckily Richard Lawrence Cohen can speak a bit for us:

These young people have not learned that those who are different from them, those who are of other colors or from other countries, those who are poor and desperate, those who are on the other side of a conflict, are as fully human as they are and are not to be â??huntedâ?? as if they were less so. This cognitive error is responsible for much of the evil that human beings have inflicted on each other throughout history.

It seems to me that some opponents of the hunt prematurely accepted the claim that the rumor was a hoax. If indeed it was a hoax, who would have initiated it? It is illogical to suppose that the opponents of the hunt were the ones perpetrating the hoax. If they perpetrated the hoax, that would imply that they knew the hunt was not going to take place. Why would a group of organizations join together to stage a protest against an event they knew was not going to take place? They would have nothing to gain, and they would inevitably be unmasked. So if there was a hoax, the opponents of the hunt were its victims as well as, presumably, the YCT.

It should be noted that in the article, the YCT-UT head does say she disapproved (slightly) of the tactic that the UNT chapter used, but if she doesn't see what's dehumanizing, well, how more obvious could it be?