By Brigitte L. Nacos
I grew up in post-war Germany and came to learn most about the country’s fascist past—not from my parents and teachers but my own efforts once I was old enough to ask questions and find answers. In the 1970s, when I learned that Neo-Nazis were marching in Skokie, Illinois, and that the ACLU supported their right to freedom of expression, I was outraged. But I remember so well what a wise and true American, who had lost his father in a Nazi concentration camp, taught me: To support freedom of expression and freedom of the press is easy, when you agree with what is said or written. But the litmus test of your commitment to this fundamental civil liberty, he said, is your support of these First Amendment rights, if you are very opposed to what is said or written or shown. I remembered his words the other day, when I learned that Columbia University students prevented an invited representative of the self-appointed border-patrolling Minutemen Project from speaking on campus. There is no excuse for what a small number of students did but many of the comments cited and posted on popular and obscure blogs transcend justified criticism as do the hateful and threatening e-mails.
I am troubled that students, however small their number,
denied Jim Gilchrist the right to express his views and themselves and their
peers the opportunity to engage him in a debate on illegal immigration
and vigilante groups to stop the influx at the borders in the
South-West. However strong the protesters oppose the activities of the
Minutemen, however strong they resented the warm-up by Gilchrist’s side-kick,
there are no excuses whatsoever for rushing onto the stage and initiating or
encouraging a brawl that ended the event.
The College Republicans at Columbia University, who invited the Minutemen
representatives, have the same right as the College Democrats and other student groups on
campus to invite speakers; they must have the assurance that their invitees are
not silenced by protesters.
Whether in class or extracurricular activities, free speech must not only be allowed but encouraged—not only for those who are in the majority but especially for those in the minority. The protesters, who silenced Jim Gilchrist, need to reread John Stuart Mill’s On Liberty and in particular his views on freedom of expression and the tyranny of the majority. Indeed, in today’s polarized ideological and partisan reality, we all should remember that Mill wrote,
“If all mankind minus one were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind.”
Of course, it is not enough to remember these words but
to act accordingly all the time--especially on university campuses. In spite of vast ideological and partisan differences, everyone should be able to agree on this point.
But free speech and discourse demand civility as well. Unfortunately, there is no civility in the hateful comments posted by bloggers that outnumber by far the voices of reason on both sides.
Comments