4 ms·

Is this really needed? I'm not trying to be obstinate. But in the north european country where I reside, while we have hate speech laws etc., my speech is prote

by tokai 5y ago

Is this really needed? I'm not trying to be obstinate. But in the north european country where I reside, while we have hate speech laws etc., my speech is protected by the law - both from the state and my employer (a university). This commitment seems very bombastic for what feels like a work environment policy to me. Am I misunderstanding something cultural here? EDIT: thx for the comments, it makes it more sense to me now.

ghaff 5y ago
In the US, your speech is largely protected by law from the state. But while there's a strong tradition of free speech in a university environment--arguably eroded in recent years, hence this letter--that is certainly not the case in most companies, especially if it's public speech.
shadowgovt 5y ago
There's some concern in some circles in the United States that universities have gotten into the habit of stifling speech on controversial topics. The reality is a bit more complicated, but MIT is choosing to go out of its way to confirm that such stifling is not part of its principles. The proof will be in the pudding... At the end of the day, a declaration of this sort only has value in so much as it shapes what the school practically chooses to do when one group on campus hosts a speaker and another group sets up a picket line to shut them down.
colpabar 5y ago
> my speech is protected by the law - both from the state and my employer (a university). Can you elaborate what it means that your speech is protected by your employer? Because that seems like something that doesn't happen here in the US - you can lose work over disagreeing with political ideologies, especially at universities.
- tokai 5y ago
  If I made public speech and I was terminated over that (or even if it could be proven that it possibly had an influence) that termination would be unlawful.
- runako 5y ago
  > you can lose work over disagreeing with political ideologies, especially at universities. Admittedly, it's been a while since I was enrolled in a college. Are there examples of this happening? Are people losing their jobs because they e.g. go to church or advocate for fewer ecological regulations or believe in lower taxes or the like?
da_chicken 5y ago
At least in the US, there have always been two places where freedom of expression is taken to its most extreme: libraries and universities. Libraries tend to take the view that even bad and hateful ideas are worth preserving simply to record how bad they are. The idea should live on in its horrific badness, an example to all of the idiocy of humanity. In my experience, you'll never meet anyone as dedicated to privacy and openness as a librarian. Universities take the view that every idea should be up for debate. It's the only way, the argument goes, to suss out the bad ideas and to harden good ideas against poor arguments. After all, if your idea is right then it should not be such a burden to examine it. The best ideas are those that survive the strictest scrutiny, so all ideas should be subject to it. In both cases, the ideal should trump the social norms of avoiding certain topics due to social pressure or how offensive they are. Not studying history, medicine, or science due to societal norms is a questionable choice on the academic search for truth, and institutions of learning and knowledge should be dedicated to that search for truth. Both these institutions, then, tend towards the philosophical ideal of free expression, not the legal reality of protected speech. When they say "freedom of expression," they're more interested in John Stuart Mill than the Constitution. Places of ideals judge themselves by ideals. It's one reason people get annoyed when there are those stories about professors expressing bad ideas and asking students to think about them critically, and students respond by attacking the professor or asking for their removal. Bad ideas are great practice for learning critical thinking skills. That said, I'm sure there are cases where the professors are sanctimonious jerks, too.
- throwaway8174 5y ago
  I don’t mean this disrespectfully, but this is completely wrong and comically naïve. It is not representative of academic libraries at elite US universities. I work at an academic library at an Ivy League school, and am familiar enough with our peer institutions to provide some context. What you describe is a very rosy and idealistic view of libraries and especially librarians. The truth is, academic libraries are extremely politicized institutions which censor information they view as ideologically inappropriate ALL THE TIME, both explicitly by culling books and implicitly through social coercion and other political maneuvers (setting up ideologically slanted committees which must approve new book purchases, etc). The examples are endless. The idea that librarians are dedicated to “privacy” and “openness” — I’m still not sure what that means tbh — is absurd. Some are, but the vast majority of PL’s are highly ideological and rigid in their thinking, will absolutely not tolerate certain views on certain subjects (fairly mainstream views, btw), and depending on the political context, have varying commitments to anything resembling privacy or openness. I’m happy to answer any questions or provide more detailed examples if anyone is interested. And this is specific to the Ivy League + schools in its orbit (Williams, Amherst Swarthmore, etc.)
pelasaco 5y ago
For sure it is needed, and you know it. You won't be protected by law from being "canceled" if you say something against what is understood as the "norm". Specially in the university world, we were reaching a situation where we couldn't scientifically study/discuss any controversial theme.
gadders 5y ago
If you have hate speech laws, then your speech is not protected.
- tokai 5y ago
  Thats my point. Even with hate speech laws the protection is apparently still better than in the US.
  - rendall 5y ago
    > Thats my point. Even with hate speech laws the protection is apparently still better than in the US. Free speech protection from government sanction is as strong as ever, but the culture of free speech is losing force in the US. Partisans seem unable to understand how it benefits them to allow speech that they find reprehensible. There have been many, many incidences of college administrators caving to complaints and sanctioning and threatening teachers and students over the past several years; not to mention de-platforming even of invited speakers.

by tokai 5y ago

ghaff 5y ago

In the US, your speech is largely protected by law from the state. But while there's a strong tradition of free speech in a university environment--arguably eroded in recent years, hence this letter--that is certainly not the case in most companies, especially if it's public speech.

shadowgovt 5y ago

There's some concern in some circles in the United States that universities have gotten into the habit of stifling speech on controversial topics. The reality is a bit more complicated, but MIT is choosing to go out of its way to confirm that such stifling is not part of its principles. The proof will be in the pudding... At the end of the day, a declaration of this sort only has value in so much as it shapes what the school practically chooses to do when one group on campus hosts a speaker and another group sets up a picket line to shut them down.

colpabar 5y ago

> my speech is protected by the law - both from the state and my employer (a university). Can you elaborate what it means that your speech is protected by your employer? Because that seems like something that doesn't happen here in the US - you can lose work over disagreeing with political ideologies, especially at universities.

tokai 5y ago
If I made public speech and I was terminated over that (or even if it could be proven that it possibly had an influence) that termination would be unlawful.
runako 5y ago
> you can lose work over disagreeing with political ideologies, especially at universities. Admittedly, it's been a while since I was enrolled in a college. Are there examples of this happening? Are people losing their jobs because they e.g. go to church or advocate for fewer ecological regulations or believe in lower taxes or the like?

da_chicken 5y ago

At least in the US, there have always been two places where freedom of expression is taken to its most extreme: libraries and universities. Libraries tend to take the view that even bad and hateful ideas are worth preserving simply to record how bad they are. The idea should live on in its horrific badness, an example to all of the idiocy of humanity. In my experience, you'll never meet anyone as dedicated to privacy and openness as a librarian. Universities take the view that every idea should be up for debate. It's the only way, the argument goes, to suss out the bad ideas and to harden good ideas against poor arguments. After all, if your idea is right then it should not be such a burden to examine it. The best ideas are those that survive the strictest scrutiny, so all ideas should be subject to it. In both cases, the ideal should trump the social norms of avoiding certain topics due to social pressure or how offensive they are. Not studying history, medicine, or science due to societal norms is a questionable choice on the academic search for truth, and institutions of learning and knowledge should be dedicated to that search for truth. Both these institutions, then, tend towards the philosophical ideal of free expression, not the legal reality of protected speech. When they say "freedom of expression," they're more interested in John Stuart Mill than the Constitution. Places of ideals judge themselves by ideals. It's one reason people get annoyed when there are those stories about professors expressing bad ideas and asking students to think about them critically, and students respond by attacking the professor or asking for their removal. Bad ideas are great practice for learning critical thinking skills. That said, I'm sure there are cases where the professors are sanctimonious jerks, too.

throwaway8174 5y ago
I don’t mean this disrespectfully, but this is completely wrong and comically naïve. It is not representative of academic libraries at elite US universities. I work at an academic library at an Ivy League school, and am familiar enough with our peer institutions to provide some context. What you describe is a very rosy and idealistic view of libraries and especially librarians. The truth is, academic libraries are extremely politicized institutions which censor information they view as ideologically inappropriate ALL THE TIME, both explicitly by culling books and implicitly through social coercion and other political maneuvers (setting up ideologically slanted committees which must approve new book purchases, etc). The examples are endless. The idea that librarians are dedicated to “privacy” and “openness” — I’m still not sure what that means tbh — is absurd. Some are, but the vast majority of PL’s are highly ideological and rigid in their thinking, will absolutely not tolerate certain views on certain subjects (fairly mainstream views, btw), and depending on the political context, have varying commitments to anything resembling privacy or openness. I’m happy to answer any questions or provide more detailed examples if anyone is interested. And this is specific to the Ivy League + schools in its orbit (Williams, Amherst Swarthmore, etc.)

pelasaco 5y ago

For sure it is needed, and you know it. You won't be protected by law from being "canceled" if you say something against what is understood as the "norm". Specially in the university world, we were reaching a situation where we couldn't scientifically study/discuss any controversial theme.

gadders 5y ago

If you have hate speech laws, then your speech is not protected.

tokai 5y ago
Thats my point. Even with hate speech laws the protection is apparently still better than in the US.
- rendall 5y ago
  > Thats my point. Even with hate speech laws the protection is apparently still better than in the US. Free speech protection from government sanction is as strong as ever, but the culture of free speech is losing force in the US. Partisans seem unable to understand how it benefits them to allow speech that they find reprehensible. There have been many, many incidences of college administrators caving to complaints and sanctioning and threatening teachers and students over the past several years; not to mention de-platforming even of invited speakers.