I have the pleasure of joining Harvard Professor Randall Kennedy today for a discussion of the state of free speech in America at Vanderbilt University. The event will be held at the Marriott at Vanderbilt University at 4:30 p.m. You can register here: globalfreespeechsummit.com/highlights/
Our moderator will be Professor Francesca L. Procaccini, who teaches at Vanderbilt in the areas of constitutional law and free speech.
Professor Kennedy and I previously debated free speech and intellectual diversity at Harvard Law School.
While the program is quite short for such a big subject, it will be great to join Randall again for a civil discussion of these important issues. I wish to thank Vanderbilt University and Professors Procaccini and Kennedy for making this event possible.
*. Tried to register for PT but couldn’t. It’s unclear if all the speakers listed will speak today at 4:30.
Honestly, it’s a list of Tariqs and charaswamys and it’s obviously anti free speech and constitution. Vanderbilt has fallen. Speakers with arms folded and closed with haughty stares.
Tragedy of tragedies if you’re in the wrong world.
Thanks anyway.
There’s a list of speakers, runs for 2 days. It’ll be blurb speaking. 3rd worlds are well represented. It’s fake. Everyone put on their brown skin suits. 😏
I pray for rescue. Maybe faith helps.
^^^ brown shirts in shark skin 😂.
Good luck, Professor. 😊
Random
Anyone register to listen to the Vanderbilt shindig? It’s not just anyone can listen like serfs and plebians. Register and they’ll notify you if accepted to listen 😂.
Not very free on the free speech VANDERBILT.
Anyone ?
^^^ one more slur, within the categories listed such as lawyer, reporter etc there wasn’t a category– public general.
PT, THE PUBLIC WASNT INVITED.
I am looking forward to this. I am so appreciative of you for doing these, and grateful they are still inviting you and remaining peaceful and respectful. You definitely are changing minds and more importantly, modeling the very behavior we all need to embrace when dealing with ideological opponents.
Well, granny? Did you listen to it?
White leftists have invented their own version of BLM: “radical empathy.” It basically means “have empathy only for radicals.” I doubt BLM and Hamas have any interest in “empathizing” with Anglos of any persuasion, but hey, let the useful idiots think what they want… for now.
Free speech meets its contradiction when it becomes militant, intimidating and belligerent. The overall productivity (problem solving capacity) diminishes as speech becomes offensive, defensive and locked into negative emotions.
It leads to either paralysis or bad policy — a ping-pong bout of overcorrections, disproportionate responses, and mounting anger. Isn’t that we’re seeing?
The really tough question is “How do we uphold the norms of civility and comity that keep the conversation productive?”
It has everything to do with human moderation, curation and mature judgment (the role human editors and producers played before the advent of social media and Section 230). It has its natural foe in algorithmic amplification of paranoias, zealotry and fabrications, and the de-socialization of young people.
Free speech is worth defending from closed-minded, timid, cowardly political censors (on both sides). But, it can’t be allowed to go too far in the direction of unhinged infowarfare. There’s a sweet spot between those bookends, where collective decisionmaking can attain the highest plateau.
““How do we uphold the norms of civility and comity that keep the conversation productive?”. Answer: If the other half says, I don’t want or have to talk with you. I don’t want a conversation, so just f-off. Do what I tell or else.
Expecting libs to conversive is not possible nowadays. But the same with reps. too.
The most telling example is the way Dems took up a militant speech tactic around 1990. Some immigration activist lawyer came up with the idea of simply refusing to differentiate legal vs. illegal immigration and immigrants. Dems picked it up with zeal. It stopped all productive conversation regarding how to enforce immigration law. Now there are hundreds of examples where language has been politicized, mostly by the left.
Nothing wrong with civil discourse and different views. But the more pointed and uncivil people get, the less is communicated. I agree with the point.
As a physician I had my share of angry people coming in to see me. Usually they were angry at previous medical failure or perceived failures but rarely that had anything to do with me personally but I was the representative of medicine so they would unload on me. It was easy to lose my temper and fire back but I found over time that sitting quietly and being excessively polite and just listening seemed to diffuse the situation.
Most people, in a controlled setting, have difficulty continuing to be angry, hostile and verbally abusive when the person opposite from them is civil, unruffled and quietly takes their verbal abuse and then responds quietly and respectfully. Not a perfect response but I can guarantee you that they come in looking for fire being directed back at them and then get disarmed by the quiet response. If you fire back angrily then you just feed their anger and nothing is communicated or accomplished.
My personal perspective. Doubt it would work on a street corner or with a mob. All the more important to remove the hecklers and disrupters and maintain control of the conversation in a debate or discussion.
Colleges seem to have trouble dealing with debates. Follow the rules, explain the rules and remove those who disrupt.
The Previouslly discussed Professor Klarman was ill prepared , did not follow the rules and acted like an unprepared undergraduate.
Cute story, maybe you should submit it to Hallmark. Its obvious you’re not a psychologist, stick to your homespun nonsense.
Tanger, you ever had to manage a group larger than a few people? You don’t sound like you’ve ever carried much leadership responsibility. The M.D. you disparaged as lightweight knows what he’s talking about.
Bullseye. It’s on our shoulders to practice quality speech by example.
DOES AI HAVE FREE SPEECH? Turn it off.
Speaking of freedom of speech
____________________
According to a recent viral post on X, a Kansas elementary school principal allegedly forbade staff from wearing shirts with the word “Freedom” on them, popularized by Charlie Kirk.
On Monday, Libs of TikTok received an email exchange between Arbor Creek Elementary Principal Melissa Snell and an (unnamed) individual in which Snell confirmed the ban.
That is not a free speech issue. Geezzz…
YES it is..
The courts have ruled on this issue before.
Prove it.
Tinker v. Des Moines
One court did, and that judge messed up badly. School principals have a responsibility to create an environment ideal for all students to learn. They need the power to quell disruptive behavior.
Only a stupid principal would allow students and staff to engage in political showboating at school. Those who have, regret it.
Prove it.
But dems don’t push hate. What to bet.
++++++++++++++++++++
Democrat AG Candidate Said He’d Put 2 Bullets in Republican State Representative’s Head and “Piss On” His Grave
By Hudson Crozier, The Daily Signal • Oct. 3, 2025 Plus this isn’t his first time.
Time for S/S to have a word with him.
The article is about a debate. How can anyone be so dumb.
So debate you say. Threatening to murder someone is now a debate?
Just how low cam the dem party go.
Wow, you are a wackjob pal. The upcoming debate has nothing to do with what you state.
Sadly the US has millions of crazies with mental health issues. Like this guy.
See you met dustoff, the local crazy. Ignore him.
Yet you had to comment….. LOL
Sorry that I’m so stoopid.
How low? In India you can sell your organs because money is nowhere to be found that is if the butchers don’t get you first. Welcome those in desperate need, welcome and bring your corruption!
That’s how low. Do you feel lucky today? Well, do you?
How wonderful PT is once again participating in debates at premier universities across this great nation. The line up of speakers is marvelous in its diversity! Brilliant speakers each one.
Thank you