The liberty principle for this
Freedom Friday concerns freedom of speech. This freedom is protected by the
First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, but it is under continuing assault.
The
latest assault took place on the campus of the University of Oregon when
President Michael H. Schill attempted to give his state-of-the-university
speech.
Schill says that he planned to
announce a $50 million gift to the university that would provide funding for
several new programs. He was unable to present his comments because students
with “a megaphone and raised fists” protested rising tuition. He posted a
recorded version of his remarks online.
Stating that he has “nothing against
protest,” Schill says that he is concerned about the act of silencing other
people’s right to speak.
I have nothing against protest. It is a
time-honored form of communicating dissent. Often, the concerns students
express very much deserve to be addressed. But the tactic of silencing, which
has been deployed repeatedly at universities around the country, only hurts these activists’ cause.
Rather than helping people who feel they have little power or voice, students
who squelch speech alienate those who
are most likely to be sympathetic to their message.
It is also ironic that they would
associate fascism with the university during a protest in which they limit
discourse. One of the students who stormed the stage during my talk told the
news media to “expect resistance to anyone who opposes us.” That is awfully
close to the language and practices of those the students say they vehemently
oppose.
Fundamentally, fascism is about the smothering of dissent. Every university in the
country has history classes that dig into fascist political movements and
examine them along very clear-eyed lines. Fascist
regimes rose to power by attacking free speech, threatening violence against
those who opposed them, and using fear and the threat of retaliation to
intimidate dissenters.
By contrast, American academia is
dedicated to rational discourse, shared governance and the protection of
dissent. Historically, fascists sought to silence, imprison and even kill
university professors and other intellectuals who resisted authoritarian rule.
So the accusation that American universities somehow shelter or promote fascism
is odd and severely misguided. (Emphasis added.)
The protesters are apparently
concerned that the protection of free speech also permits neo-Nazis and white
supremacists to voice their views. Even though he is opposed to all that these
groups profess, Schill explains that “offensive speech can never be the sole
criterion for shutting down a speaker.”
Schill continues with an explanation
of how “the word `fascism’ has deep emotional connotations for me. It’s the
reason for great suffering in my family. Two generations ago, members of my
extended family were thrown into concentration camps and murdered in Eastern
Europe during the Holocaust.” He explains that he is offended when anyone
accuses him of “leading an institution that harbors and promotes fascism,” but
that does not justify censoring another person’s right to speak. We must have the
freedom to share our ideas, even offensive ones, in order for our society to
move forward. The students are definitely misguided in their attempt to stop their
university president from speaking.
No comments:
Post a Comment