Posted on 03/02/2018 4:48:29 AM PST by Kaslin
Recently, a professor of history at City University of New York (CUNY) objected to my support for specific provisions of North Carolina’s HB527, which allow student hecklers who disrupt campus speeches to be subjected to campus disciplinary procedures. After he shared one of my remarks on Twitter, many of his followers made accusations of “hypocrisy.” Their reasoning was that one’s opposition to safe spaces requires support for an unfettered right to heckle speakers. In other words, the person who seeks to restrict heckling is somehow creating a safe space for campus speakers. Therefore, he must also support safe spaces generally lest he be guilty of hypocrisy. This argument, which is easy to rebut, is the subject of today’s column.
Understanding the need to prevent a heckler’s veto of speech requires some degree of historical literacy. Those who wish to learn about the history of those who have claimed a right to shout speakers down in the name of free speech need only read the Supreme Court’s opinion in Gregory v. Chicago (1969). In this landmark case, Dick Gregory was attempting a peaceful protest against continued school segregation in defiance of another landmark decision, Brown v. Board of Education (1954). White racists who did not like his speech threw things at him and shouted him down by screaming racial epithets, including the n-word. When Chicago police asked Gregory to stop speaking he rightly refused. Along with several other peaceful protestors, he was then arrested.
When the Supreme Court justices overruled Gregory’s conviction, they were affirming the common sense view that there is no First Amendment right to negate the First Amendment rights of other citizens who are assembled peaceably and speaking lawfully. Put simply, the police arrested the wrong people in Chicago that night. It does not take a PhD in history to arrive at such an obvious conclusion.
Nor does it require much intellectual firepower to understand that opposition to providing safe spaces and support for providing protection from hecklers are completely consistent positions. Those of us who oppose safe spaces on campuses do not like the idea of permanently setting aside physical areas where certain viewpoints are banned. We reject the efforts of those trying to assert a right to feel comfortable as a means of negating even mildly offensive speech. The idea of allowing emotions to negate ideas is simply antithetical to the notion of a classical liberal education.
Of course, the same logic leads us to oppose the heckler. He simply cannot lose control of his emotions and begin screaming until the speaker can no longer be heard. Allowing such a negation of speech on our campuses is also antithetical to the notion of a classical liberal education.
In addition to being logically confused, the pro-heckling supporters of the CUNY history professor have confused their facts. By demanding that hecklers refrain from shouting me down during my speeches, I have not asked for the creation of a safe space. When I am finished speaking, the opposition can simply occupy the very same podium (read: space) and express the opposite point of view. Any group should be able to schedule an event in a university auditorium, regardless of the viewpoint they are advancing. And any heckler who tries to shut it down should be ejected, regardless of his viewpoint. This is not hypocrisy. It is simply common sense applied consistently.
But let us talk for a moment about the hypocrisy of the heckler who also supports permanent campus safe spaces. He demands a place to share his ideas without opposition – and he does so in the name of safety and comfort. Yet he kicks and screams in the presence of others who wish to speak outside of the designated safe space. Thus, his commitment to “safety” and “comfort” hinges upon his agreement with the viewpoint being expressed. His hypocrisy is further accentuated by the fact that he adopts the tactics of yesterday’s racists and calls himself progressive.
Of course, this is not progress. Nor is it liberalism. It is ignorance and fanaticism marching backward under the banner of enlightenment.
Please Freepmail me, if you want to be added, or removed from the ping list.
Mike Adams rules...one of my favorites. And he is spot on in this article.
Spot on.
The man fights the fight. Fearless. Rational. Cutting and incisive, and DOESN’T BACK DOWN!
I really admire him. He turns leftists into spittle-lipped, bug-eyed caricatures of who they actually are. Given their mental instability (They are Leftists, after all) Mike Adams is a brave man.
Mike Adams for president!!!!
Those aren’t caricatures. They’re portraits.
I am reading David Horowitz’s book “Big Agenda: President Trump’s Plan to Save America” and he talks about the tactics Conservatives need to use to start effectively countering the tried and true tactics of the Leftists...and people like President Trump and Mike Adams have been doing just that.
Leftists up to now would attack Conservatives with ad hominem personal attacks to gain the high moral ground by saying things like “You are a despicable, racist, wife beater, and...” to which, like Charlie Brown lining up to kick a football held by Lucy, the Conservative would say (If they said anything above a whimper at all) “I’m not a racist! I don’t beat my wife...” etc. Like predictable clock movements, they would respond to the hand-rubbing glee of Leftists.
Trump doesn’t appear to play that game much, if at all, and Mike Adams NEVER has. Doesn’t back down an inch. Leftists don’t seem to know what on earth to do when the Conservative patsy not only doesn’t roll up in the fetal position, but actually swings back and strikes them in the nose!
The look of pain, surprise, confusion, and fear on their faces is what every young boy who has swing back and connected against a bully has seen in THEIR eyes!
I LOVE it. If I had to suggest a campaign slogan for President Trump’s next campaign, it would be “Hit ‘em Again, Donald!”
Yes..exactly!
Although, to me, their portraits are so easily merged right back into caricatures, which are far more entertaining!!!!!
Logic? All “A” is “B”. Some “B” is “C” ergo all “C” is “A”?
I agree.
We’ve let ourselves be pushed around by false accusations.
“YOU’RE NOT NICE!!!!”
And we think, *Oh no! They think we’ve not nice. We’d better give them what so they think I’m nice*.
They are MANIPULATING us with words and our response has been despicable.
It’s even worse when they start quoting the Bible at believers and misapplying it, knowing that believers will not want anyone to think they are not being spiritual so they capitulate instead of what Jesus did when Satan misused Scripture. Give it back.
Great idea for the next campaign slogan.
While some of the way Trump has presented himself has been less than impressive, I so admire someone who has the wherewithal to stand up and speak the truth that needs to be said.
I highly respect a man who knows how to be a man.
And for all who despise him for his past, well, not a one of us is in any position to throw the first stone in self-righteous indignation. I daresay, that if any one of us were in his position of power and wealth, that we may not have done as well as he did.
Nor would any of us want either our thought lives exposed to the world to see, nor do we want to be judged by our past lives especially if and when we profess faith in Christ as Trump has. If he has truly accepted Christ as has been reported, then God has forgiven him and we need to also.
It just occurred to me how stealth the left tries to be with their symbolism of everything; since this nonsense is all about ‘safe spaces’ we can shorthand it and call them the ‘SS’ which it is. Freakin fits them imho
Thx....I just ordered that book on Amazon...(BUYCOTT Thursday....since Amazon hasn’t backed down to the fascists, I’m supporting them today.)
One more twisted mind. In a true educational situation one listens the debates. Heckling is for those with weak opinions or of weak mind. Also proper etiquette something University Professor dictates you respect your guest.
That is a reasonable approach!
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.