FrontPageMagazine.com Prints Student's Article on Horowitz Visit to Delaware

DAVID HOROWITZ BROUGHT HIS "THINK TWICE" tour to the University of Delaware on Nov. 29, and what went down that night was a shameful display of the censorious impulses of the campus left.

Horowitz’s lecture, titled "War and the Hate-America Left" was sponsored by the Young America’s Foundation and Young Americans for Freedom. His appearance drew nearly 300 people, including dozens of protestors.

The evening started fairly calmly. Mr. Horowitz attended a special pre-dinner with student sponsors of the event, and all in attendance enjoyed a nice discussion.

But outside of the room in which Mr. Horowitz was to speak, some thirty protesters, all university students, were gathered, wearing black bandanas and holding angry-worded signs. They gradually came in before Mr. Horowitz began his lecture, walking as if they were in a funeral procession.

Mr. Horowitz was introduced, and the audience was reminded to remain respectful. Mr. Horowitz spoke for about 40 minutes on the anti-war "fifth column" of the Left, which he labeled as a threat to America from the inside, and the terrorists who plan to kill all Americans. He also talked about the reparations ads controversy. During this time, the protesters, since they weren’t allowed to bring their large signs in, raised paper fliers with words like "I disagree" and other one-liners. They weren’t too disrespectful during his actual lecture, other than whispering, laughing and clapping during a few points.

It was during the question and answer period when things got ugly. There were many questions asked, more than the normal amount Mr. Horowitz usually takes. But the caliber of the questions, at least from most of them, was poor. The questions were based in assumptions they had already made about Mr. Horowitz. As the period went on, the Leftists got agitated, and became really disrespectful. The Q&A session did get a little out of hand, and merely turning off the microphone as we had planned on doing during such incidents didn’t help because they were screaming.

Mr. Horowitz himself worded some of his responses in a way that guaranteed reaction from the leftists in attendance. Two or three of them were really disrespectful, using the F-word and other profanity. One of these was a member of the university allocations board, which appropriated money to help pay for Mr. Horowitz’s honorarium. She screamed that he should be more respectful to the student protesters, since they had "paid" for his appearance.

Another student protester screamed that she loved her country, and that all that Mr. Horowitz is is a contrarian. He asked if she was a pacifist, and she said yes. He said that he respected that. Not five minutes later, he used the word "pacifist" in an answer to a question. The "pacifist" student screamed at Mr. Horowitz, and said to stop calling the protesters names. He clarified that he wasn’t using the word in a derogatory manner. The audience was again reminded to be respectful. Some of the protesters shouted back that Mr. Horowitz wasn’t being respectful to them, and so they had every right to act up.

The event ended at 8:40 pm. Before Mr. Horowitz left, I talked to him for a short time. He commented that it was the first time the protesters at one of his events dressed "uniformly." He also said that this was one of the longest question and answer periods that he had ever done.

The following Tuesday, the student newspaper on campus, the Review, printed several articles about the Horowitz lecture. To put it mildly, their coverage was biased, and poorly written. One protester who was interviewed accused Mr. Horowitz of using racial slurs, a totally baseless accusation. They devoted half a page of the editorial section to a column that was very derogatory of Mr. Horowitz.

The Left displayed contempt for freedom of speech that night. This was most prominently displayed in their actions. One of the protester’s signs said: "Free Speech, not Hate Speech." It wasn’t Mr. Horowitz, but the protesters who were spouting hate speech that night. Speech thatdissents from leftist orthodoxy is often labeled "hate speech," and its messengers "bigots," or even worse. This is the unfortunate situation that exists on many American campuses. Only constant challenge by conservatives will bring down this academic monopoly.

Matthew Balan is the president of the University of Delaware chapter of the Young Americans for Freedom. He is a senior and a political science major. He can be reached at mlbalan@udel.edu

Here's my other original post:

Here's the editorial that I wrote for our student newspaper. Unfortunately, it wasn't printed. Instead, they printed a column in the editorial secion that took up half the page. It was definitely biased, to say the least, and defamed Mr. Horowitz. It's basic rant is how Horowitz is "crazy." You can read it here.Oh well, I reach a bigger audience here. :)

I would like to comment on the David Horowitz lecture on Thursday November 29th.

My organization, and several others, sponsored the David Horowitz lecture. We hoped that Mr. Horowitz's conservative message and unique perspective would draw many people to hear him speak. We were also aware of the controversy surrounding many of his opinions. We hoped that the University community would respect his freedom of speech. Apparently, some of our fellow students couldn't handle his appearance and what he had to say.

I attended one of the organizational meetings of the protesters who showed up at Mr. Horowitz's lecture. Most who attended this meeting had strong feelings against Mr. Horowitz's point of view. They all agreed to respect his freedom of speech, while at the same time, sending a message that they disagreed with his viewpoint.

The night of the lecture, the protesters lined up outside Rodney Room. Many had signs decrying his "hate speech," and criticizing the cosponsors of the event. The one thing I did not understand was the apparent contempt for free speech that some of the protesters had. One signed stated "Free Speech, not Hate Speech." Do they not understand that in this country, all speech, save for perjury and obscenity, is protected? Also, just because Mr. Horowitz has viewpoints that are contrary to what the protesters believe, does this automatically make it "hate" speech? Finally, why were the protesters so critical of the cosponsors? Just because they cosponsored the event doesn't mean they agree with everything he has to say. As the organizer of the event, even I don't agree with everything he says.

I think the ones that were really spewing "hate speech" that night were the protesters. Mr. Horowitz, for the most part, acted civilly. He was his usual provocative self, but what he said did not warrant the response the protesters gave. What happened to "two wrongs don't make a right?" On several occasions, protesters used profanity when they got up to ask questions. They rudely screamed and disrupted the lecture. They held up signs during the his speech, which many thought were distracting.

What do these actions say about our university, and the protesters in particular? The actions of some of these protesters reflect badly on all of us as a community. This man was our guest, whether you like him or not. I think the protesters need to acknowledge the consequences of their actions. I think he should have been treated with more respect. Contempt for any form of speech is contempt shown for all speech. I hope that in the future, we can all respect those who have the courage to advocate the controversial.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.