The Dartmouth Civil Liberties Union and College Democrats co-sponsored a discussion on free speech yesterday evening, an event that featured speeches from Acting Dean of the College Dan Nelson '75 and Andrew Seal '07, editor of the Dartmouth Free Press.
The forum focused on how an institution can prevent acts of intolerance and bigotry without trampling free speech. About 20 people attended the forum.
"There is an element of power going on where the socially powerful deem what discourse is deemed valid or legitimate and what is not," Seal said. "The nature of discourse at Dartmouth is extremely skewed in favor of Greeks, whites and males."
Nelson also refuted allegations that Dartmouth had a speech code in place. Such allegations have been levied most recently by Stephen Smith '88, a petition candidate the Board of Trustees, who, on his website, says he wants to "ensure freedom of speech at Dartmouth." But the perception among alumni that there is a speech code at Dartmouth is mistaken, Nelson said. Seal agreed, calling talk of a speech code at Dartmouth rhetoric used to garner attention.
"Previous trustee candidates have run on similar platforms," Seal said. "They gain attention for these libertarian ideas."
The preposition that Dartmouth does have a speech code stems largely from the participation of College President James Wright and other members of the administration at the Solidarity against Hatred rally last November, Seal said.
"This is an offensive maneuver to tell the administration what they can and can't do," Seal said. "This platform is destructive to Dartmouth's sense of community."
Nelson admitted that the "Principle of Community" and the "Freedom of Expression and Dissent," both in the Student Handbook, sometimes seem to be in conflict.
While the principle of community says that Dartmouth students should be sensitive towards one another, freedom of expression and dissent is also protected. Nelson, however, was adamant that Dartmouth does not employ a speech code.
"The Board of Trustees has decided on an institutional commitment to protect freedom of expression, when push comes to shove," Nelson said.
Questions after Nelson's speech contested whether such rhetoric held up in light of the College's treatment of Zeta Psi fraternity. The fraternity, however, was held accountable for harassment, not as part of a speech code, Nelson responded.
"Zeta Psi printed newsletters that named students and wrote about their sexual behaviors," Nelson said. "Those targeted asked them to stop and they didn't, so the fraternity was held accountable for harassment."
Not all members of the audience were convinced by Nelson's and Seal's argument that no speech code exists at Dartmouth. Social constraints do limit our speech, said Kathy Oprea '10, a member of the Dartmouth Civil Liberties Union.
"The DCLU believes that more speech is always better," she said. "In general there is not a written speech code on campus but there are some social constraints that need to be addressed."
Nelson admitted that preventing intolerance completely is impossible.
"It is impossible to prevent acts of bigotry or hatred," he said. "No human society has ever managed that. You just want to reduce the number of such incidents."
Nelson's goal for Dartmouth, he said, is to create an environment where different views are questioned but also deemed valid.
"It's important to try to understand another point of view as it is to make one's own point of view known," Nelson said. "There is a human tendency to presume that our point of view is right and everyone else is a little mistaken."
During the event, an interruptive cell phone ring caused Nelson to reconsider his stance against a speech code.
"The only kind of speech I want to inhibit is cell phones," he said to laughs from the crowd.
