Sure, and we shouldn’t have to herd protestors into “Free Speech Zones” either. But looks like neither you nor I get what we want today.
25 Likes
Feeling obligated to channel John Stuart Mill in this case. Regardless of what I may think about Ann Coulter’s philosophy and pronouncements, it is wrong for me to decide the question for others, without allowing them to hear for themselves and judge accordingly. That is what is happening here: a threat of violent (re)action is robbing people of their right to listen, evaluate, and judge for themselves.
9 Likes
No, I’m saying that only state actors are forbidden from infringing upon free speech, per (my understanding of) the US Constitution. I’m no lawyer though, so don’t rely on my opinion.
5 Likes
So if we don’t want to hear her lies and vitriol we aren’t good citizens? Fuck that.
18 Likes
But the university is a state actor, their choice to curtail speech because that speech or it’s implications had become distasteful to them is a free speech issue.
4 Likes
Nope. Her sponsors backed out and the University offered her the same venue the following week. She declined. As usual, some people erroneously define “free speech” as a mandate that people have to be subjected to their vitriol. That’s not what it is. Say whatever you’d like, just don’t get pissy when everyone walks away.
14 Likes
That’s where it can get tricky, yes. But I thought it was the conservative sponsor that withdrew support, not that the University forbade it. I only scanned the article though, so I may be wrong about that.
Is it harmful to choose not to host and event because the last time a similar event was hosted there was violence and vandalism? Is the right to free speech the right to demand that a space of your choosing be allocated to you so you can speak when and where you wish?
Coulter has multiple books, a website, plenty of other websites who would publish any content she produced for them, a twitter feed, and people who would be happy to organize space for her to speak in public at many venues. Is she being oppressed?
Anne Coulter cancelled the event after her sponsors backed out. The University did not take any stance on whether her views were distasteful or not (though they do appear to have concerns about security related to having incendiary figures speaking on campus). The University has not banned her from campus and actually suggested an alternate time. She could very easily exercise her right to free speech on Berkeley campus by travelling to Berkeley at a time of her choosing, standing in any publicly accessible space, and saying whatever she chooses. Hundreds of millions of Americans are currently not being oppressed by the lack of a large public audience on Berkeley campus, Anne Coulter can join them.
29 Likes
To turn a well-worn xkcd on its head, if the best you can say about your suppression of free speech is that it wasn’t literally illegal because the law only forbids state actors from doing so, then you’re holding yourself to a pretty low standard.
You’re free not to listen. It’s kind of shitty to prevent other people from listening by threatening violence, though – don’t you think?
You can imagine the same thing happening to John Scalzi or someone if you want to exercise your empathy a bit.
12 Likes
Yes, for the same reasons that it is harmful to negotiate with kidnappers or terrorists. Violence and vandalism aren’t morally neutral like the weather.
4 Likes
You want to talk about free speech as a principle, yeah, maybe, sure. Free speech as a legal right, though, is much more limited in scope.
I think the distinction is pretty much irrelevant to my comments so far, not sure why you’re saying it.
I said (paraphrased):
- If you only defend the “legal right” interpretation of free speech and not the principle, then you’re holding yourself to a pretty low standard.
- Justifying the prevention of speech through threats of violence by making the distinction you made is a shitty thing to do (also, preventing the speech through violence is even shittier).
- Allowing speech to be prevented through threats of violence is long-term harmful for the same reasons that negotiating with kidnappers and terrorists is harmful – it shows the tactic is effective and invites copycats.
4 Likes
Again, Berkeley students protesting her on their campus doesn’t mean they are shutting down her free speech rights. There are plenty of public forums for her to express herself. Students have a right to debate who they want to have on campus, as they pay fees for these sorts of programs.
17 Likes
Yes it is, because it shows that the “heckler’s veto” works on you, so it will continue to be used.
2 Likes
Yep, she’s a big champion of (the right people’s) free speech… so long as there’s a paycheck in it.
7 Likes
I guess this means Bob Jones University will be canceling Dan Savages’ invitation now.
6 Likes
I never argued that the students didn’t have a right to have such a debate.
In this context, my disagreement is with the decision by Berkeley’s administrators to postpone the event due to concerns about student safety.
It’s also morally wrong to threaten violence in response to speech or to prevent speech. I would say protests that do not involve violence or disrupt the talk itself are fine (buying all the tickets, attending, and turning your back on the speaker for the duration could be a pretty good protest IMO), but the fact that the protest against Yiannopolous’ talk turned violent is beyond the pale. I think that fact puts a burden on protesters to publicly commit to non-violence and take active measures to prevent it.
Like I said, imagine John Scalzi got the Yiannopolous treatment and then I dunno maybe Wil Wheaton’s talk got canceled because of the risk of violence. Fair? Reasonable?
4 Likes
Wingflakes?
2 Likes
I’m getting paywalled, so pardon me if this is a dumb question:
Do we know what “Both groups say the atmosphere surrounding her visit has grown too hostile.” actually involves?
I certainly wouldn’t be surprised by fairly plausible plans on the part of a nontrivial number of aspiring nazi-punchers that would amount to a quite reasonable concern; but I also wouldn’t be surprised by a paragon of intellectual honesty concluding(cynically if probably correctly) that “Ann Coulter oppressed by liberal fascists!” will be both a much better story, and a lot less tedious, than anything Ann Coulter is going to talk about; which creates a slightly perverse incentive on the part of the event backers.
Given two plausible, but contradictory, hypotheticals; I clearly need data.
3 Likes
I’m disappointed to see this boring troll transformed into a brave and stalwart exponent of free speech. Way to go, Berkeley.
Remember when we had to choose between supporting the authoritarian government of North Korea and defending a shitty Seth Rogan comedy? Things never change.
9 Likes
