508
submitted 15 hours ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

In academic discourse, use of the correct name is an important means of establishing professional credibility. For example, if within the fields of computer science and information science, a specific term of art, such as artificial intelligence, has gained widespread acceptance, the use of an alternative term—a term, like superintelligence, not widely accepted within the discipline—would seriously undermine the credibility of academic work (and the author’s more general standing within the field).

Donald Trump has notoriously attempted to rechristen the Gulf of Mexico as the “Gulf of America.” So too has he attempted to rename Lake Ontario to “Lake America,” and he is threatening to fashion new MAGA names for an ocean, a major river, and the state of New Mexico. Trump also recently signed an executive order requiring all federal government programs and communications to use the terms superintelligence and S.I. rather than the broadly accepted nomenclature artificial intelligence and A.I. One might shrug all of this off and say, “Well, so what? It’s a free country, and all of us can still use the generally accepted names of places (Gulf of Mexico) and things (A.I.).”

Unfortunately, after Oct. 1, 2026, this is no longer the case for academics at state-sponsored colleges and universities in Alabama. H.B. 2 officially bans the use of the phrase Gulf of Mexico by any and all state employees. As a professor at the University of Alabama School of Law, I find this appalling.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top new old
[-] betanumerus@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 minute ago

I say the University of All-Banana and I can do whatever we want.

[-] bold_atlas@lemmy.world 1 points 5 minutes ago* (last edited 23 seconds ago)

officially bans the use of the phrase Gulf of Mexico by any and all state employees.

These aren't banned.

Gulf of Epstein
Gulf of Iran
Western Persian Gulf
Gulf of Latin America
Gulf of New Mexico

[-] bedwyr@piefed.ca 1 points 21 minutes ago

It's south america now guy, nobody gives a shit.

[-] northernlights@lemmy.today 10 points 2 hours ago

Do it anyway, get unlawfully fired, sue, get rich.

[-] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 16 points 3 hours ago

And if you refuse? What are they going to do if you keep calling it by its proper name? This is clearly censorship by a government entity. Any retaliation would immediately lead to a First Amendment lawsuit.

[-] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 0 points 1 hour ago

censorship of a government entity by a government entity. first, no right is unlimited. second, when you're employed by the state, you contractually agree to waive certain rights.

[-] Sam_Bass@lemmy.world 12 points 3 hours ago

do it anyway. fuck google

[-] JamieDub86@piefed.social 5 points 3 hours ago

When are they going to ban books and studying, or say stupidity is intelligence?

[-] billwashere@lemmy.world 18 points 5 hours ago

How is this not a first amendment thing? Since this is a state run public institution, so essentially the government, controlling what private citizens say. Just because it’s a law doesn’t mean it’s constitutional.

[-] qevlarr@lemmy.world 17 points 5 hours ago

Wait 'till you hear about laws banning criticism of Israel

[-] ripcord@lemmy.world 4 points 3 hours ago
[-] Agrivar@lemmy.world 8 points 3 hours ago
[-] DrSoap@lemmy.world 5 points 3 hours ago

Lol, I can't wait until they start arresting Jewish people for being antisemitic then

[-] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today -3 points 3 hours ago

Yeah, that's not happening, not in America anyway.

[-] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 6 points 5 hours ago

It probably is. It's been just over a month since the law was inacted. It usually takes months for the court cases to even start. First someone needs to be "harmed" to have standing. So now this guy could sue and say it's deteriorating his academic credibility. But it would be months, maybe a half year or more before it finally hits the state supreme court to be overturned.

[-] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 3 points 3 hours ago

Somebody needs to use the phrase in a document, get punished for it by the state. THEN they've been harmed, and they'll have standing to sue.

[-] TrackenDaKracken@lemmy.world 10 points 4 hours ago

Your students can say it. Have them say it in chorus whenever it comes up. "Gulf of..." "Mexico!"

Between colleagues? Fuck that law.

In writing, I suppose you're stuck with it.

[-] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 hours ago

The Gulf of, under regime decreed federal and state statutes of abdul ablibli mohamed -2 coercion of speech and institution funding, America, named for purposes of this discussion, is internationally recognized by every other nation as the Gulf of Mexico.

[-] modus@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago

What's the penalty for refusing to accommodate their infringement on your freedom of speech?

[-] Gammelfisch@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago

The Alabama Oblast is a backward ass regressive shithole that should secede from the Union.

[-] Microtonal_Banana@lemmy.zip 5 points 5 hours ago

So how do history teachers do their jobs? That some very Alabama legislation.

[-] anon_8675309@lemmy.world 4 points 5 hours ago

Malicious compliance: just say “the gulf”.

[-] kerryh8er04@sh.itjust.works 3 points 4 hours ago

Most of the South already did.

[-] Quilotoa@lemmy.ca 3 points 4 hours ago

Could you say Gulf of Cuba? It's also on the same body of water and gets around the ban.

[-] moxyy@lemmy.world 12 points 8 hours ago

Every record has been destroyed or falsified … every statue and street and building has been renamed, every date has been altered.... welcome to the Trump United States of America America.

[-] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 1 points 3 hours ago

MAGA AmeriKKKa

[-] IndustryStandard@lemmy.world 4 points 6 hours ago

This says a lot more about the US education system than Trumps decree

[-] loaf@sh.itjust.works 112 points 13 hours ago

Suddenly, conservatives are upset about deadnaming. 🙄

[-] FenrirIII@lemmy.world 3 points 3 hours ago

It's called 'Merica-naming now

[-] Prior_Industry@lemmy.world 28 points 10 hours ago

Isn't this the government overreach they're always harping on about ..

[-] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 4 hours ago

It was always projection. Every single time.

[-] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 1 points 3 hours ago

They're just protecting us from the Libz.

[-] visnae@lemmy.world 19 points 10 hours ago

(The gulf formerly known as) Gulf of Mexico, or (The gulf with the international name) Gulf of Mexico, wouldn't work?

[-] SomeRandomNoob@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 6 hours ago

I would not care. If someone complains i would call them a Traitor Fellon Rapist Turd Ass Licker and flip them the Finger. A day later i propaby be sitting on the street begging for money. But under no circumstances i would play with the Turds Bullshit.

[-] Fmstrat@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago

Nobody says you can't cough and mumble the past word. Every time.

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 19 points 11 hours ago

The cons are some of the most petty of snowflakes.

What are they going to do if people use the right name for the Gulf of Mexico?

[-] Ioughttamow@fedia.io 30 points 13 hours ago

Mexico, Gulf of

Chalchiuhtlicueyecatl

Or… British Petroleum Thunderdome

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] dou9m@lemmy.ca 44 points 14 hours ago

People still think this is the land of freedom lol. I’d guess 70% of Alabama doesn’t care about this, how far off am I as someone who hasn’t gotten to experience the people IRL?

load more comments (9 replies)
[-] foggy@lemmy.world 26 points 13 hours ago

I'm not a lawyer. I'm 99.99% sure that if the institution is state run (like a university of Alabama situation), then they open themselves to civil rights litigation if they were to fire you for this.

[-] Archer@lemmy.world 7 points 10 hours ago

Civil rights litigation with a Nazgûl Supreme Court majority doesn’t mean much

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 07 Nov 2026
508 points (99.4% liked)

politics

31775 readers
4362 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
  4. No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS