I find it very concerning that, on college campuses today, there is a large number of students who believe that “free speech” is a negative, because the term has been used by some white supremacist types lately. Arguments are made such as that making free speech part of a campus vision statement is antithetical to being welcoming of minorities, because it means that “ideas are valued more than individuals.” Free speech, this argument goes, “marginalizes” students of less privileged backgrounds.
The history of speech in our country and elsewhere shows that the people who end up being suppressed by speech restrictions are those who challenge the existing government and power structure. So, ultimately, the loss of free speech protections would hurt members of less privileged groups and minorities far more than it would hurt members of groups in power!
IMO, the answer to an imbalance of power of speech is not to remove freedom of speech, but rather to work to include more voices!
I am beginning to fear for the loss of our democracy, as democratic norms are under attack from both the right and the left.
Actually, more voices than ever before can find audiences through social media. But many of them are uncivil extremists (and the politics of race/ethnicity/identity that dominates politics today gets uncivil very easily), conspiracy theorists, or naive people who believe easily-verified-to-be-false things and reshare them, so they often end up dominating what people see on social media.
Even among “big media”, partisan media is more popular (compare the viewership of Fox and MSNBC, which became more partisan earlier, to CNN, which tried to stay in the center the longest (no longer)), and careful, accurate reporting has taken a back seat to getting the most sensational scoop on the air as quickly as possible.
Freedom of speech is obviously better than censorship, but the uncivil viciousness that is inevitably getting worse is hardly ideal, and is probably causing more people (both right and left, and not just in colleges) to devalue freedom of speech, which is obviously a threat to democratic norms. Improvements in photo and video editing technology and techniques will also make it harder for people to detect falsified news.
I think universities are to blame by not emphasizing free speech rights. I thought what Harvard did to those students who made hateful tasteless “jokes” was such a dangerous lesson. But Harvard may not have to give its students free speech rights. My niece who attends Stanford was stunned when she was told that Stanford could not have done the same because California law requires universities to adhere to the First Amendment even when private.
She couldn’t believe that the First Amendment protects hate speech. I had to send her multiple case law rulings for her to grasp it. And she’s a very bright kid. She really had to read a lot to understand just how limited exceptions to FA free speech is and that “incitement” often bandied about by those opposing free speech is such a limited concept.
I think every university, especially those bound by the First Amendment should explain why hate speech is both legally protected and morally wrong.
As a huge believer in free speech rights as fundamental to the nature of our democracy and free society I don’t like the repulsive racists and anti-semites that engage in morally reprehensible speech. But I will as one thinker greater than me said, defend them to my death.
When my daughter was in high school there was a history/gov club that got together monthly to discuss politics. A teacher led discussions and they were taught how to civilly disagree, how to debate their position with facts, etc…A nearby school banned the discussion of politics on school grounds because it was “too polarizing”. I think we need to continue to teach the next generation how to respectfully argue and disagree. It seems to be a lost art these days.
Perhaps less of a lost art than people not wanting to practice it. The loudest voices are often those trying to incite anger, hate, and sometimes violence, not respectful disagreement.
It’s not that I’m not in favor of respectful argument. I am. But in the context of free speech, emphasis on that is what causes students to believe that if it’s not respectful it’s not protected. Understanding and accepting why our free speech rights are so broad needs to be the first step. Otherwise students become caught in a vicious trap of seeking to censor speech.