Giving the Devil His Due
Why liberals must own the 1st amendment like conservatives own the 2nd
BY MICHAEL SHERMER
In 2015 I was tasked with giving a speech at the California State University, Fullerton under the title “Is Freedom of Speech Harmful for College Students?” Since I matriculated as an undergraduate in the early 1970s on the wave crest of the free speech movement of the late 1960s, I was taken aback that anyone would doubt this central tenet of liberty. My speech was three words long: “No. Thank you.”
Of course, I explained why freedom of speech is sacrosanct for a civil society (not to mention a college campus), but it was what triggered the invitation that was revealing. The campus, it seems, was roiling over a controversy captured in a headline in the Orange County Register: “Cal State Fullerton Sorority Sanctioned for ‘Taco Tuesday’ Party.” The sorority’s sin was “cultural appropriation,” or arrogating someone else’s culture as your own, for which members of the originating group are allegedly offended. Never mind that there’s no evidence that Hispanics feel appropriated by us gringos eating Mexican food (in California no less), the very idea is absurd inasmuch as all cultures are an amalgam of appropriation.
Signs of trouble in the academy — now spilling over into society at large — were evident starting around 2013 with the deplatforming of controversial speakers, the call for trigger warnings about sensitive subjects in books, films, and lectures, the creation of safe spaces for students to retreat to when encountering ideas they find disagreeable, and the dispersal of lists of microaggressions, or words, phrases, and statements that might offend someone. The paroxysms of student outrage that have brought college administrators to their knees are by now well known, leaving onlookers to wonder, what went wrong?
(excerpt continues)
I get disgusted at times over the little things that people will shout their lungs out over, mainly because this "culture of victimhood" deminishes the seriousness of actual victims, of people who have been wronged. With all the shout of liberals this and liberals that from people who are even in my own family, blaming outcries for a want of attention and on people who have 'fragile minds' it makes some people who have actually been wronged submit to their circumstances and refuse to ask for help for fear of being degraded as just another snowflake. I feel that there are many who have no sense of the maturity in walking away from people who disrespect them. Its a lack of growth in the individual (in my opinion) to not know when to let things simply slide off their backs and go about their day. I feel there is a strength in the ability to do so which is sorely lacking in our present day society- on both sides, I have seen not only liberals take issues too far but also the traditionalists, who believe that they can say anything and get away with it (im thinking of particular people in my life here who get offended at anyone who disagrees with their outlook on life) I just think we would all get along better if we learned to listen instead of dispute, and walk away instead of attack.
ReplyDeleteThe excerpt of Justice Douglas' conclusion in the given case reflects my opinion on the matters of free speech and censorship: "[The] function of free speech under our system of government is to invite dispute. It may indeed best serve its high purpose when it induces a condition of unrest, creates dissatisfaction with conditions as they are, or even stirs people to anger. Speech is often provocative and challenging. It may strike at prejudices and preconceptions and have profound unsettling effects as it presses for acceptance of an idea. That is why freedom of speech, though not absolute, is nevertheless protected against censorship or punishment."
ReplyDelete