A video shot by Campus Reform shows young Americans vowing to give up their right to free speech in order to make other people feel more comfortable and avoid offending them.

Reporter Eduardo Neret asked several students how they felt about their social media accounts being monitored by schools and universities, and the majority are fine with it.

One girl in the video tells the reporter “I definitely think they should be monitoring the hate speech because that shouldn’t be allowed.”

She added that she would willingly allow anyone access to her private information “if it has to do with helping the school in…creating a sense of more safety and security and erasing the hate speech.”

Others commented that they “have nothing to hide,” and would happily sacrifice their First Amendment rights to save others becoming offended.

“I would do that, cause I mean if I’m just giving up a little of what I care about just to make others feel better, I’d do that,” one individual commented, adding “I’d make that exchange.”

The video comes on the heels of a similar report from Campus Reform that found most young Americans have no idea on the origins of the 4th of July celebration, or when and how America won Independence, nor which country it gained autonomy from.

Issuing the ultimate woke wishlist, The Faculty Association at California State university has demanded that all “Black Native, and Indigenous students” should be given free tuition as a “redress for systemic anti-Black racism in the CSU.”

The CFA has also charged that “the historical and longstanding infrastructures of universities” should be dismantled because they are “fundamentally grounded in a white supremacist colonial discourse and culture.”

Campus Reform reports that the CFA also wants to overturn the ban on affirmative action, and is arguing that “racial pay equity” needs to be implemented because “workload is also higher for Black faculty given that CSU faculty are majority-white, and CSU students are majority of color resulting in ‘cultural taxation.’”

Without providing corroborating evidence, the faculty also claims that research conducted by Black students is “often not valued at the same level as other faculty.”

A further demand outlines that there be “Black faculty available to serve as reviewers for Black faculty candidates,” so as to counter “white supremacy”, as well as “dedicated study space” for Black students only.

The faculty also demands an expansion of curriculum for Ethnic Studies, creating Black Student/Resource Centers, and enforcing “unconscious bias” training for all students.

In addition, the faculty urges support for initiatives toward “the full abolition of the police,” claiming that Black, Native, and Indigenous students can “not rely on police for safety,” and that law enforcement has “racist roots” enhancing “the dehumanization of Black people.”

For good measure, the woke demand list also includes a petition for protection of the Black LGBTQIA+ community.

The CFA’s statement says that it “recognize[s] that the movement for queer and trans liberation was catalyzed by uprisings led by QTPOC (queer and trans people of color), often against police violence.”

It concludes that students should continue “building on a radical and beautiful legacy of resistance.”

This is indicative of demands from woke student groups across the nation. For example, at UCLA, a Professor was recently placed on leave and subject to threats of violence after he rejected requests to allow black students to take final exams at a later date, purely because of the colour of their skin.

Other reports from elsewhere in the country have indicated that black students are demanding they be given leniency, or just better grades, to combat ‘systemic racism’.

A senior researcher at Michigan State University was effectively fired after sharing facts from a study conducted last year that conclusively proved there is no widespread racial bias in police shootings.

Physicist Stephen Hsu was forced to resign from his position as vice president of Research and Innovation after being hounded by a Twitter mob for using facts to counter their claims that police are systemically racist.

Hsu interviewed MSU Psychology professor Joe Cesario last month, who has found from extensive research that “the race of the officer doesn’t matter when it comes to predicting whether black or white citizens are shot.”

Cesario’s study concluded that “contrary to activist claims and media reports, there is no widespread racial bias in police shootings.”

After the study was cited in a June 3 Wall Street Journal op-ed called “The Myth of Systemic Police Racism”, The MSU Graduate Employees Union slammed Hsu for bring attention to the research, charging that it  does “not alight with public statements issued by MSU.”

GEU Vice President Acacia Ackles commented that “It is the union’s position that an administrator sharing such views is in opposition to MSU’s statements released supporting the protests and their root cause and aim.”

Hsu announced on his blog  “The GEU alleged that I am a racist because I interviewed MSU Psychology professor Joe Cesario, who studies police shootings.”

“Cesario’s work…is essential to understanding deadly force and how to improve policing,” Hsu urged, adding that he has also come under fire for bringing light to research into genetic differences of races.

The GEU created a “Fire Stephen Hsu” petition demanding the researcher be fired from MSU, claiming that “The concerns expressed by the Graduate Employees Union and other individuals familiar with Hsu indicates an individual that cannot uphold our University Mission or our commitment to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.”

“This started as a twitter mob attack, with very serious claims: that I am a Racist, Sexist, Eugenicist, etc.” Hsu wrote.

While the original petition garnered over 800 signatures, a counter petition defending Hsu quickly reached more than double that and more with 2,000 signatures.

“Over just a few days, 1700+ individuals from around the world signed the support petition… Among the signatories are hundreds of professors from MSU and around the world, and an even larger number of PhD degree holders,” Hsu noted.

The counter petition stated “there is zero concrete evidence that Hsu has performed his duties as VP in an unfair or biased manner. Therefore, removing Hsu from his post as VP would be to capitulate to rumor and character assassination.”

“The voices demanding Hsu’s removal are exactly wrong in pitting diversity and inclusion against free inquiry and freedom of speech.” it continued, concluding that “true diversity flourishes best under conditions of free inquiry.”

The mob won out, however, with MSU asking Hsu to resign on June 19th.

“I do not agree with his decision, as serious issues of Academic Freedom and Freedom of Inquiry are at stake. I fear for the reputation of Michigan State University.” Hsu wrote after he was forced out.

MSU President Samuel Stanley threw Hsu under the bus, stating that  “When senior administrators at MSU choose to speak out on any issue, they are viewed as speaking for the university as a whole. Their statements should not leave any room for doubt about their, or our, commitment to the success of faculty, staff and students.”

Hsu is not the only scholar to be hounded by the woke mob recently.  At Loyola University New Orleans, students have demanded the firing of professor Walter Block over his opinions on slavery, even though he vehemently opposes it.

At UCLA, a professor was suspended for rejecting requests to allow black students to take final exams at a later date as a response to the death of George Floyd and black lives matter protests. Accounting lecturer Gordon Klein was punished for saying that students should not be treated differently according to the colour of their skin.

Meanwhile, other academics have been lauded and rewarded for promoting opinions in line with the woke mob that even Twitter removed for being hateful.

These cases perfectly illustrates how the woke mob don’t really care about freedom of expression or diversity of opinion. You may hold morally sound beliefs but still be targeted for cancellation because you do not have the exact same opinions as they do, or highlight facts that bring their dogma into question.