Haven't had time to go through all of these videos, but I will just add a little bit from my own personal experience in the academic world. As an adjunct, I"m exactly the kind of person who has the most to lose from the culture of offense: We have no job security whatsoever, and can be let go for pretty much any reason, however trivial. But I haven't really felt any ill effects from students who are offended by course material, whether they be from the left or right of the political spectrum.

I generally follow a 'best practices' approach: I don't use trigger warnings labeled as such, but I do give indications as to potentially difficult or upsetting material when it clearly seems sensible to do so. I've taught papers and books which argue for all sorts of strange and potentially offensive views, including: that there is no God and Christianity is a sham, that morality and free will are illusions, that we have a moral obligation to produce the genetically best children, that abortion is permissible up until the first two years (!) of an infant's life, etc. In seven years of teaching, I haven't had any real issues with students who say they're too offended by the material or don't want to hear about it. Hell, the fucking Bell Curve came up during class discussions a few times without incident.

The closest I ever come to genuinely offending students' sensibilities happens whenever I teach Peter Singer's "Famine, Affluence and Morality." Singer argues that we have a moral obligation to donate pretty much all of our disposable income to charitable organizations like Oxfam or the Against Malaria foundation. He says that we have to keep donating until we ourselves are almost at the level of the global poor. Since most college students already are pretty close to that level, it doesn't resonate too much for them.

I'm not from Great Britain but I admire Peter Hitchens and believe he is correct on several topics. I also listened to his brother a great deal. I miss him.

I think this debate really took a simple issue and complicated it to a great degree. I believe the question of free speech and freedom of expression is rather straight forward: the people of a country should have a right to express their views and themselves despite the fact that it may hurt someone's feelings or potentially offend someone. I think political correctness is a cancer that eats countries from the inside out and causes a great deal more division among the people of a country than a few opposing thoughts or peaceful protests ever will.

Progressives think free speech ought to be restricted? I think it's more like: someone says something offensive, and since the news is now worldwide, ALOT of people can be offended at once.