5 ms·
It is more specifically the case that the idea of free speech as a prized element of a society is under threat, than the actual practice of free speech. We need
by detcader 8y ago
It is more specifically the case that the idea of free speech as a prized element of a society is under threat, than the actual practice of free speech. We need to be mindful of separate things: actual individual free speech events happening, laws about speech, and society's consideration of free speech as a virtue aren't all the same "free speech" thing.
But who is threatening the virtue? Who is The Real Threat To Freedom Here! I think it's actually just various people in various political groups, from progressive students at universities to people with actual power like NY States's Cuomo with his radical anti-BDS laws and executive orders.
- kentm 8y agoI like the distinction here. I find the "no platforming" question the most troublesome, because there should be freedom of association and one should not be forced to provide a venue for views that they disagree with. But at the same time, there is a point where limiting access to a venue has a real detrimental effect on free speech. Universities have an obligation to provide a wide variety of dissenting views and not be eco chambers. But at the same time they have limited space and so they must, at some level, pick and choose which speakers get access to those venues. How does one choose which ideas are valuable enough to get access to limited space?
- detcader 8y agoIt's mind-boggling that it has to be limited. What are universities for? Every day every university should have hundreds of guests thinkers and grad students streaming through doing paid speeches and Q&As. If half of them are Alex Jones fraudsters, ok, let students protest and leaflet outside all they want, which would be even more exchanging of ideas and facts.
- kentm 8y agoIt's mind-boggling that it has to be limited. I meant that in terms of physical space availability, of which there is a finite amount. Theres only so many conference rooms that can house a visiting guest speaker.
- furgooswft13 8y agoI don't think that's a real issue. It's not like all the controversial speakers are trying to speak at the same university at the same time. Usually these spots are planned weeks or months in advance, plenty of time to book a room. In fact most of the spots that have been called off were canceled well after they were scheduled and confirmed. If a university for whatever reason does not want to host the speaker at all, then just come right out and say so. Saying "Oh so sorry, we're all booked for the next 6 months!" is just a transparent excuse.
- kentm 8y agoIts not specific to those examples though. Think of it like a thought experiment: a university literally can't host everyone so there's some criteria by which a guest needs to be judged. In America, a lot of the spots were cancelled, IIRC, because protests necessitated increased security that couldn't be arranged or paid for. I'm not sure thats on the university.
- burfog 8y agoProtests are an excuse. Protests are allowed and even encouraged by the university. If the university actually wanted to stop protests, it would be trivial. Simply remove all support for protesters. (make this known in advance) This means: access cards stop working, transcripts are made unavailable, employees are fired, degrees are revoked, scholarships are terminated... some of this can be retroactive too. When this has been done even in relatively limited form, protesters quickly stopped causing trouble. When the university gives tacit approval to the protesters, things quickly spiral out of control.
- kentm 8y agoProtesting is a pretty fundamental right and societal value in America though. Cracking down on protests is, in my view, just as authoritarian as what the universities are accused of.