In a commitment to free expression, universities nationwide should be fostering speech in all forms, at all times. | Ajani Stewart/The Cougar
In the wake of protests in Berkeley, California, and the ensuing support for silencing speakers deemed upsetting by the left, we all should step back and reflect upon the idea that has made our society truly and classically liberal.
Free speech is more than a mere law; it is a defining principle of our society. It is not merely one among many competing values. Properly understood, it is a foundational value that supports all else that is good in our culture.
We hold this truth to be self-evident: that free expression, the foundation of a liberty-loving society, is granted to us by our creator and cannot be justly restricted by the institutions of man.
Free speech and government
Those who believe government grants us our rights fail to comprehend this essential feature of the American tradition. If government grants us free expression, then it has the ability to constrict it by requiring that it be exercised in the proper place with proper consent.
I do not hold to that idea and neither should you.
The moment we give individuals the authority to decide where and when you can express your views, we relinquish the power to freely dissent. Being at liberty to do so is not merely a concoction to benefit the few; it protects us all no matter our race, religion or ideology. It provides universal benefit, and we must never lose sight of that basic truth.
In his immortal treatise On Liberty, John Stuart Mill described the virtues of free expression.
He said: “He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that.” And further, “The particular evil of silencing the expression of an opinion is that it is robbing the human race…those who dissent from the opinion, still more than those who hold it. If the opinion is right, they are deprived of the opportunity of exchanging error for truth; if wrong, they lose, what is almost as great a benefit, the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth, produced by its collision with error.”
Even if a suppressed opinion may be erroneous, it often contains a kernel of truth. Since no view is ever perfectly formed, by the battle of wits we elucidate the unknown. This argument is not about law, but rather a personal responsibility to engage with those whom we disagree.
Any restriction on the expression of an opinion reduces the total knowledge of humanity and immorally robs from history the conclusions of our frank and honest debates.
Constraining free speech
The problem with confronting free speech with forceful demands that it be stopped is not that it runs counter to law — the Constitution constrains only the government from such action, not individuals. The problem is that those actions trample the principle of liberty that a pluralistic society must cherish.
Rather than shout down speakers, we should hear them out (or not — you’re not required to listen) and then counter speech we find disagreeable with our own. If you truly believe your views are correct and important then you should use every opportunity to persuade others rather than banish dissent.
Shutting down discussion is merely a self-gratifying exercise rather than one of academic courage. The corollary to this notion is that any restriction on the locations where free expression can be conducted similarly constricts the voices of those who wish to be heard.
The only difference is that, where speech is restricted to designated places, the coercive force is exerted by administrators and police rather than by a mob. Free Speech Zones are, therefore, an aberration which have no place in a university setting.
Rather than talk about what areas of campus should be Free Speech Zones, an understanding of the rationale and importance of free speech should cause us to flip the argument around. Instead of designating a few areas as places where we allow the exercise of liberty, we should consider all of campus to be a place of free expression barring only the few requirements necessary for the functioning of the University.
For example, it would not be possible for a professor to teach if people were to protest inside her classroom.
By looking at the entire campus as a Free Speech Zone as the starting point, and only then limiting the few necessities, we make a statement of our values: We will no longer aspire to the bare minimum of the law but rather to the maximum of our principles.
In a commitment to free expression, universities nationwide should be fostering speech in all forms, at all times, and everywhere that does not diminish the ability of the school to perform its functions.
I urge our beloved University to similarly codify its own commitment to fostering dialogue, free expression and open inquiry by all students, faculty, staff and guests. The University of Chicago described the importance of and its commitment to this value in its “Statement on Principles of Free Expression.”
It is high time we make a similar pledge.
In Whitney v. California, Justice Louis Brandeis said: “If there be a time to expose through discussion the falsehoods and fallacies, to avert the evil by the process of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence.”
History senior Matthew Wiltshire is the president of College Republicans at the University of Houston. History senior Michael Anderson is the chapter president and Texas state chair of Young Americans for Liberty. Both can be reached at [email protected].
It is obvious that former Wehrmacht soldier George Soros is behind the Progressive Strong Arm Tactics happening at UB-Berkeley and anywhere Conservative Speech is being proclaimed.
Progressives only understand Socialist Approved Speech, and if you approach anything near Conservative Speech or what the Democrats call Hate Speech, on down with PC, smaller government, lower taxes, strong national defense, true legal immigration, etc., they call it Hate Speech, and I’m proud of Conservatives shoving it back in their faces.
Thankfully, many Right of Center people, are shrugging off the hateful condemnations of being called “Racists,” when it is Leftist themselves that are vandalizing Black churches, etc., with pro-Trump labels.
Figures like Donald Trump, Rush Limbaugh, Milo Yiannolopolis, and others are certainly not going away any time soon. The President’s win last November was a turning point, because if Clinton were to have won, you would be assured that she would have been even worse than Obama. And individual freedoms would continued to erode.
Consumer confidence and increased business activity is a great indicator on how a country feels on its outlook. Obama and Hillary had no interest in a Great United States. Trump is optimistic and is winning the day, and the country is responding.
In fact, Democrat leaders took steps to better themselves rather than to better society as a whole, because what does an independent, free thinking, self-supporting individual, Black, White, Hispanic, etc., need with the Democrat Party? It is against their self-interest to even be associated with Democrats who treat their constituents like drones, allowing them to come to the feeding trough every two years, to be fed Democrat oats.
And what do they get out of that … enriched White Democrat leaders … while the Black ghettos and barrios remain the same. Chicago is still killing each other left and right, Baltimore, Detroit, and other Democrat run cities are still a mess.
When I see a Democrat Press Conference I see a vastly white crowd. They complain of diversity, but where are the Blacks at the top of their leadership? Obama didn’t really qualify as a Black seeing as he rarely visited a Black community, nor lifted a thumb to beautify or improve those areas.
Where are the White Democrats calling for improvement in Detroit Public Schools? Where students engage in adult like late night activities in the back of the classroom or in the hallways in plain sight of school authorities.
It is obvious that only Socialist Approved Speech is being ingrained into kids heads at Democrat run schools. Teachers are in good part responsible for the problem. They are the ones that pump socialist thought and global warming non-sense, as well as anti-Republicans and anti-Trump stances in our kids skulls full of mush.
I went to Austin last week for the birthday of an elderly aunt. In conversation with a cousin, he reported that his niece had come home and told her parents that her teacher said Trump is bad. And I wouldn’t be surprised that if the girl went back to her class and said that Trump is good, she would undoubtedly receive negative feedback from her teacher.
My cousin is a Hispanic-Republican, and he saw the light a long time ago, abandoning the Democrat Party because it did not identify with him. And he is converting his immediately family of brothers and sisters, and their families.
But I still have Democrat cousins as well, and in conversation with them, they were disheartened, and a disrespectful of Trump. They vote Democrat for the sake of voting Democrat, and will believe anything coming out of Liberal Media. And these are wealthy people, yet cannot see that the Democrat Party is against their self-interest.
Free speech is a Right given, but we do not have a Right to be Heard. I don’t listen to CNN, or other Progressive media, because I can recognize Democrat fluff when I hear it, and why make myself stupider by listening to it.
Democrats and George Soros paid protesters are denying the Rights of Conservative speakers to even speak, and are not exercising the option to not hear it or take it to heart.
You could just write an article. Anyway, we’d love to have you in the club if you’d like to join. Hit us up. https://www.facebook.com/groups/272445576474378/
I know I would be the best columnist The Daily Cougar has even seen, but I have other duties that require my time, other than the few minutes that it takes me to formulate a response to what’s posted here.
I’m actually doing the writers a favor by commenting on their work, especially if writing is their intended art in which they aim to make a living from.
It’s a rough World out there James, and universities sending snowflakes out there has many of them scared.
Look, if I write a comment more than the length of piece itself, then clearly the writer has not done their homework, and is just writing Democrat or SocProf talking points.
That Dana Jones piece about Betsy DeVos was easy to pick apart. Public schools, of which there are some good ones; but for the most part, are training grounds for the next generation of dependent Democrats. Standards went out the window long ago, replaced with student coddling, which creates situations where students are not prepared for skills training or even college. That’s why universities have remedial classes.
Look, to show that I’m not an evil Republican, I’ve created a disqus channel, so if any TDC columnist wants to send a piece before publication, I’d be glad to give indication of what possible comments I would make to help them write a better final piece with as little blood spatter as possible on my point.
https://disqus.com/home/channel/uhdailycougaradvise/
Its sort of like when reporters would send their pieces to the Clinton Campaign for approval. But your people would get less end-product commentary from me.