The shoutdown in Chapel Hill
Those of us who went through the agonies of the ill-advised and ultimately unconstitutional Speaker Ban Law in the 1960s were dismayed to read of the ugly confrontation between students, some faculty members, police and former U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo, the immigration opponent who was scheduled to speak on campus but was in effect shouted down by protesters the other night.
The most troubling thing was that the UNC-Chapel Hill campus appears to be intolerant of free speech -- especially if that speech appears to be bigoted, racist and offensive. I don't agree with Tancredo on anything that I know of, but disrupting his appearance and ultimately prompting him to flee does not solve the problem that students perceive -- that someone has thoughts they don't want to hear. Instead, it creates, maybe confirms, the impressions of many conservatives that university campuses are tolerant only of speech with which they agree and are intolerant of speech they find offensive. That's hardly the definition of academic freedom. Had students really wanted to irk Tancredo, they would have listened in stony silence, or perhaps turned their backs and walked out.
Such incidents also may play directly into the hands of those who agree with Tancredo and who oppose not only illegal immigrants in this country, but legal immigrants, too. Tancredo and his allies are using the UNC-CH incident to raise funds, ultimately strengthening financial and perhaps popular support for their
cause as well.
The lesson of the Speaker Ban Fiasco has been lost on students who believe free thought is dangerous. The truth is that it's more dangerous to ban speech than it is to hear the speech of those with whom you disagree. But to many people, evidently, the First Amendment is a scary thing.
If you want to see the take of lawyer Hugh Stevens, a former editor of the Daily Tar Heel and veteran of the Speaker Ban wars in the late 1960s, here's a link to a column that ran in today's Daily Tar Heel at UNC-Chapel Hill.
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
16 comments:
The liberal way, freedom of speech unless we disagree.
It's amazing how tolerant the left is when they disagree with an opposing view.
I support the movement to allow same-sex marriage for illegal immigrants.
it's completely asinine how you left-wing, bow-tie wearing, sanctimonious members of the NC media must qualify your "outrage" at these recent events in Chapel Hill by calling Tancredo a bigot...you are simply a grown-up version of the students who exhibited such embarrasing behavior.
Let me see if I can sum up this article:
"How dare you punks give more ammo to my political enemies by proving what I've been denying all these years!"
The students who didn't agree with Tancredo should have held their own rally at another location on campus; that's what we did when the KKK came to Chapel Hill in the 80's.....
Talk about a backhanded defense. You say Mr. Tancredo has free speech even though he's a "bigot" and "offensive."
Perhaps he and others like him simply disagree with you, Mr. Betts. Did you really need to qualify your support for free speech by demonizing Mr. Tancredo?
Anon 2:58 The left doesn't have logic on their side. That is why they demonize anyone with opposing views.
Mr. Betts,
Would you mind publishing exactly what Mr. Tancredo has said or written that makes him a "bigot". I do not consider someone a bigot for being concerned about illegal immigration. Nor do I consider anyone a bigot who would like to examine immigration policy in general--I believe that immigration policy in the U.S. has been examined and re-examined many times during our history. One can look at a policy to determine if it is functioning as intended without being a "bigot". You and the rest of the Observer editorial staff might gain a bit of credibility on this issue if you could explain exactly how you came to the conclusion that Mr. Tancredo is a bigot. I look forward to seeing that explanation. Thank you.
Yes, Jack, how about printing the comments that justify calling Tancredo names. I can’t speak for Tancredo, but I know I made a point of focusing on illegal acts and explicitly stating race, color or country of origin was not my issue, but my comments were not reported and the lies of the advocates for illegal immigration were reported as truth.
And while you’re at it, if you really believe “it's more dangerous to ban speech than it is to hear the speech of those with whom you disagree,” explain why you and the rest of the capital press corpse refused to print the facts I produced proving malfeasance by your political favorites? When Peter Gadiel travelled the state as a representative of those who lost loved ones 9-11, why wouldn’t the press report what he said?
The public errs when they believe papers report the news; they only report the news the editors choose to reveal. Would that the feds would pursue the accomplices that have helped conceal the political crimes for so long.
I consider myself to be a moderate liberal, but the antics of the far left as of late are just as reprehensible as anything the far right has ever come up with. Freedom of speech, apparently, only applies if you agree with me (in the figurative sense, not the literal). The media who fuel the fires are just as bad.
What kind of name is Tancredo anyway? I do resent these people coming here telling us how to run our country, but the liberal students should have let the guy speak. Such folk are much less dangerous when their ideas are exposed to the light of day, rather than letting them portray themselves as martyrs.
If the good people of Colorado didn't learn anything the other summer when their crops were rotting in the fields, and they keep electing folks like Tancredo, then that's their business.
Illegal means exactly that. This is not a race issue, but rule of law. Why don't the US chage there immigration policy and allow more people from Latin America to obtain visa's? It's ashame when people speak the truth and then are labeled a bigot or racist. Political correction is ruining this country.
What kind of name is Tancredo anyway?What kind of an idiot question is that?
Anon 8:29 it's the only way the left can make an argument by attempting to belittle you.
I hope Tancredo comes back and chokes you with your prissy little bow-tie due to your libeling him.
Of course, Tancredo is a MAN and you're a prissy little twat.
Go to Hell (i.e. Mexico - the place where the only people you love live).
Post a Comment