Unfortunately, "Sure, I support free speech... until you say something that I disagree with!" seems to be the outlook of a growing number of Americans. It is an attitude increasingly prevalent in our country among media figures, the private sector and especially academic institutions.
A prime example occurred only a few weeks ago at Columbia University. The Columbia Republican Club invited members of the Minutemen Project to speak at the Ivy League school in Manhattan. The Minutemen Project is an organization whose members have taken it upon themselves to patrol the U.S./Mexican border in an effort to prevent illegal immigration.
The 200-person audience, comprised mostly of students, received their guest speakers with an incredible level of rudeness. Minuteman speakers Marvin Stewart and Jim Gilchrist were barely able to get in a complete sentence without being interrupted by screaming students. The shouting reached such a level that Stewart's voice, projected over a microphone, was completely drowned out. Several students stood up and turned their backs on the speaker. As the event continued, rudeness turned to violence as a group of protestors rushed the stage during Gilchrist's speech, throwing punches and breaking furniture. Several students held up a sign reading, "No one is ever illegal."
The reaction of the Columbia audience is absolutely appalling. But what is even more startling is the apparent failure of these students to realize the fault in their actions. Even after the heat of the moment had passed, one student protestor commented, "I don't feel we need to apologize or anything. It was fundamentally a part of free speech. . . The Minutemen are not a legitimate part of the debate on immigration."
This student's understanding of free speech is a far cry from accurate. First of all, every citizen in the United States is a legitimate party to any debate. Secondly, the blatant hypocrisy of this statement is unbelievable. This student champions the right of free speech while at the same time suppressing a group from expressing its view. Ironically, he maintains that everyone has a right to citizenship, while simultaneously asserting that some people do not have the right to free speech. Even worse, he feels that it is his place to decide who gets to speak and who does not. Although only one student spoke for attribution, the conduct of his fellow protestors implies similar attitudes.
Not only does this type of reaction show disrespect, but it also exhibits ignorance. Apparently lacking a coherent argument, these frustrated protestors responded in the only way they could: by screaming and yelling, much like the behavior of a toddler who does not get his way. Had these students any class, and had they anything intelligent to say, they would have quietly listened to the speeches, and voiced their questions, or even statements of disapproval, at the end of the talks.
This reaction also exhibits a lack of the intellectual curiosity that would be expected at such a prestigious academic institution. The Minutemen Project's members have been called racists, vigilantes and fascists. One would think that an audience of esteemed academics would have been interested in hearing what this group had to say in its defense. One would think that Ivy League scholars would have been interested in a fair debate. But this was not the case -- far from it.
The incident at Columbia is part of a larger trend. At a Seattle high school, two teachers recently filed a lawsuit in which they claimed that they had been subjected to a hostile work environment. One rationale was the mere invitation to conservative commentator and Dartmouth alumnus Dinesh D'Souza '83 to speak at the school. These teachers claimed that this invitation exhibited racial discrimination based on D'Souza's opposition to affirmative action. The controversy surrounding the invitation was so intense that the school board caved in and rescinded the invitation.
The notion of free speech implies that everyone is entitled to participate in an open and respectful debate by voicing their opinions. The fact that teachers and students now feel they have a right, through violence and litigation, to suppress the opinions of those with whom they disagree is extremely discouraging. Don't they realize that by suppressing the free speech of others, they run the risk that, one day, their own opinions may be suppressed?
