We have been discussing how colleges and universities are expanding the range of micro aggressions and hostile or hate speech to troubling levels in terms of free speech and associational rights. Now the expression of political views in the presidential election has been added to speech that students have declared threatening. Someone at Emory chalked the name of Republican candidate Donald Trump around campus. Nothing unusual about that. Students often chalk up statements on sidewalks for causes or candidates. It would not be seen as in any way unusual and the next rain brings a clean slate. However, the statement of support for Trump has led to a protest calling for the supporter to be punished or expelled and for the President to express condemnation of such political affiliations. The students want a statement of support for Trump to be treated as the same as the writing of a swastika. The students have said that they feel threatened in the wake of the statements of political support for Trump.
Students organized immediately after seeing the statements of support and had a meeting with Emory President James W. Wagner to demand action. Students demanded to know “Why did the swastikas [on the AEPi house in Fall 2014] receive a quick response while these chalkings did not?” They were not happy when Wagner reportedly responded that that was a case of an outside threat. The questions reportedly became more pointed like “What do we have to do for you to listen to us?” One student demanded that Emory send out a University-wide email to “decry the support for this fascist, racist candidate.” To his credit, Wagner refused to denounce a presidential candidate. The students then demanded diversity hires into the “higher positions” of the University, including the Board of Trustees and the faculty in general.
What was particularly chilling is the demand for action on faculty members who have not publicly denounced Trump or his views under the view that “[Faculty] are supporting this rhetoric by not ending it.” This failure, the students insisted, have created a threatening environment and that “people of color are struggling academically because they are so focused on trying to have a safe community and focus on these issues [related to having safe spaces on campus].”
Wagner is reportedly preparing an email and has launched an investigation to find the culprit. University police are looking at security cameras. What will they do if they find some student with the incriminating chalk? Will she or he be expelled or disciplined or publicly denounced?
I have some obvious concerns about such action. My primary concern is whether this is the truly the first time in the history of Emory University that students or faculty made political statements on sidewalks. I doubt it. Would the same effort to hunt down the writers occur if the writing referred to Sanders or Black Lives Matter or Greenpeace? If not, this would seem a content-based effort that raises serious issues of free speech. Moreover, the expectation of some of these students that faculty should be pushed to denounce Trump like some Pol Pot reeducation camp is chilling.
I have written previously how free speech is under attack in the West and we appear to be raising one of the most anti-free speech generations in the history of our country. In the name of “tolerance,” we are treating free speech as the scourge of society and a right that must be carefully controlled to “protect” others. These students believe that political views are now within the gambit of threatening speech. We have come full circle from the sixties where baby boomers discovered political and social activism on campuses — a time of great upheaval but also great exploration. However now that students and staff are embracing a conservative, the desire is to have official condemnations and investigations. Trump has clearly generated both great support and great opposition. His views, however, (particularly on immigration) are shared by millions of citizens. Indeed, those same views are prevailing in part of Europe. This is a wonderful opportunity to have a passionate and substantive debate. Why not let all political flowers bloom on campuses? Rather than immediately seek to silence those with countervailing views, the first inclination should be to engage in the debate and value the exchange of ideas.
Before Wagner takes action, the faculty should at a minimum ask for the university to address how it has previously addressed chalk art and political statements. If all chalking is now going to be treated as an offense, will the university be distinguishing art but not political art? The problem with chalk crimes is, forgive the pun, drawing lines on what is prohibited or permitted speech.
What do you think?
Source: Emory Wheel
Thinking of old Abe, who had a wide and varied exposure to life, we are missing a golden opportunity.
The Defense Dept along with Congress has opened up the whole of the Forces to all sexes and sexualities. What better way to ensure full integration with equal pay for equal work and upward mobility than the draft without exemptions….even do away with F4….as there are places for all. Qualified F4s providing child care….changing dirty diapers…..might actually see miraculous hearings. (OK, a civilianized program may be employed but each kid would have to serve outside their home state.)
Now here is a shovel ready program with logistical support to work around the world. “You want jobs, you want jobs? You can’t have jobs” until you’ve served in the muck or desert of Africa, or the swelter of Southeast Asia or the Central/South Americas. Even foreign states like Louisiana.
Imagine the incoming classes to Emory after full implementation. Suntanned, fit and disciplined young men and women with real purpose in their lives who have actually earned college funding.
The post WWII GI Bill was one method to delay the full influx of a fighting force from hitting a reducing manufacturing capacity. It wasn’t fully altruistic….the Veteran revolt following WWI was very much in the minds of many. But the rewards of the GI Bill was phenomenal…a revitalized and growing middle class.
Might even slow down politicians in sending THEIR kids into “no exit strategy” situations.
“They sound more and more like FOX viewers that seekers of education.”
This is a howler. I would bet damn few FOX viewers require a “safe place”.
These are Leftist crybabies pure and simplet, *that* is not in dispute.
The biggest advocates of shutting down speech in 2016 aren’t from the American Right. If Trump supporters went to a Hillary (or Bernie) rally and attempted to shut it down or block access, these individuals would be charged with a hate crime. Imagine if some conservative had done the same at a Messiah! (Barack Obama) rally in 2008.
When speech is silenced, people begin contemplating other means to send a message.
The persecutors will make society and ultimately their own lives worse with their heavy handedness.
I thought of all speech, political speech was the most protected. Who has been teaching these kids? Did they learn this at Emery or in their high schools? And that the administration is caving is even worse. Who runs the university? Clearly not the administration. And what the hell constitutes a safe space and how big is it?
“The philosophy of the school room in one generation will be the philosophy of government in the next.” Abraham Lincoln
Feeling so unsafe….
“Hunt down”
Da libs be a us’n der secooond mendmt riits.
Now dontcha all ferget dat powdrd diinooomite be a wurkn much betta dan da goonpadr. Dunt uus da waddn. Jest a poot dat der ball doon da barell un tap i’ doon rail herd at leest tree tims.
Ah doont be a takn ur loooved uns wid ya. Ah heerd St Peters a loookn ferward to seeun ya partee sooon.
Politics follows culture, not the other way around. There are serious academic types in the US who are arguing for hate speech laws and doing so with a straight face. Expect to see hate speech laws which carve our exceptions to the 1st Amendment.
Can we please implement padded college classrooms for these kubaya liberal woosies who can’t handle anyone else’s views or opinions.
What are they going to do in the real world? I think I’m going to invest in Prozac and other mind bending legal drugs. lmao!
I hope the school administration will see this as an opportunity to discuss rigorous academic debate, the free exchange of ideas and the principles of free speech. I doubt it, but I hope they do.
DKL what are you trying to say?
Justice Holmes sound like one of those CNN viewers. Is that a bad thing like classifies Fox viewers?
Leave it to the professionals. Subway train graffiti team with midis touch sends message.
And the administrators for that matter.
The irony that these students are using their 1st amendment rights to demand the administrators infringe 1st amendment rights seems to be completely lost on these students.
If anything that I don’t agree with is hate speech then all speech is hate speech. WOW! Isn’t that what the Emory University outburst, and similar outbursts from other institutions of higher learning, portends? I fully believe that political correctness is a disease and a very dangerous one at that. Followed to its logical conclusion will lead to my opening sentence. Is this a logical progression from an entitlement mentality?
Aw the poor dears – they were frightened.
Seriously, is this intolerance or a cynical ploy to gain power?
These unimportant young people have grabbed center stage by attacking the First Amendment – they now have power and status that they lacked before.
By giving their terrified bleats credence, we give them an importance that they do not deserve.
These babies aren’t even smart enough to see this infantile behavior plays right into Trump’s playbook and will make him our next President.
Hate speech laws – coming soon to a locale near YOU!
The students who are now attending colleges and universities in the country fail to appreciate the importance of open debate and free expression. They prefer to hear only that with which they agree. They sound more and more like FOX viewers that seekers of education. It’s appalling.
The fact that administration’s are going along with this is an indictment of our academic “leaders” who seem more interested in big salaries and special loans for second homes than standing up for the open debate of ideas,