Below is my column in The Hill on the recent controversy at Rutgers University, where different groups are pushing to ban Turning Point USA and Professor Mark Bray, the author of the “Antifa Handbook.” The campus has become a microcosm of a broader debate in higher education, which continues to struggle with drawing lines on free speech and academic freedom. Notably, the faculty and the student body recently overwhelmingly voted to support Bray, but few have spoken out in support of the TPUSA group.
Here is the column:
Last week, faculty and students signed a petition to oust the local Turning Point student chapter from Rutgers University. The call followed a separate demand from the group to fire Rutgers Professor Mark Bray, the author of the “Antifa Handbook.”
As is often the case, both sides are portraying themselves as defenders of free speech while seeking to silence others.
Free speech is back in vogue on many campuses. Faculty members are suddenly aghast over threats to free speech after staying entirely silent for years as conservative faculty were purged from departments and conservative speakers were cancelled on campus. Democratic leaders like Hillary Clinton, who supported censorship under the Biden administration, are even declaring themselves free speech champions.
The Rutgers controversies are a truly teachable moment on how free speech values demand more than supporting speech that you like. The test of principle is supporting the speech of those with whom you disagree, even those whom you despise.
Those of us in the free speech community are rarely called upon to defend popular speech. More often, we support the speech of those who not only hate free speech but hate us as well. Many of those we protect have worked to deny the free speech of others.
Soon after the assassination of Charlie Kirk, I wrote how the way to stand with Charlie is to stand with free speech. Charlie was the target, not the proponent of cancel campaigns.
I was disappointed, therefore, when the Rutgers TPUSA members called for the firing of Bray. I have long been a critic of Bray. Indeed, I testified about Antifa before Congress, ran columns on the organization for over a decade, and wrote a book discussing Antifa. That has included years of criticism of Bray and his book.
Bray has long been a controversial figure in academia. In a 2017 Washington Post article titled, “Who are the Antifa?” Bray wrote, “Antifascists argue that after the horrors of chattel slavery and the Holocaust, physical violence against white supremacists is both ethically justifiable and strategically effective.”
Bray’s writings have rallied extremists to this cause for years.
One petition states that “Dr. Bray has regularly referred to mainstream conservative figures such as Bill O’Reilly as fascist while he calls for militant actions to be taken against these individuals. This is the kind of rhetoric that resulted in Charlie Kirk being assassinated last month.”
It also notes that Bray gives half of the proceeds from the “Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook” to defending arrested Antifa members.
Despite such criticism, I oppose efforts to fire Bray. There is no evidence that Bray has ever engaged in violence or criminal conduct. He is an academic with clearly extreme views, but to fire him is to become no better than Antifa itself — the most violent and anti-free speech movement in our country.
In his “Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook,” Bray explained how Antifa is made up mainly of “anarchists or antiauthoritarian communists” who believe that “‘free speech’ … is merely a bourgeois fantasy unworthy of consideration.”
Bray is now on the receiving end of a blind rage exactly like what Antifa has been unleashing against its targets for decades. He fled to Europe due to threats against him and his family. Whether you call it karma or irony, those who would thus intimidate him are no better than Antifa. His firing would be an assault on both free speech and academic freedom protections.
In the meantime, other Rutgers faculty and students are seeking to expel Turning Point. Their petition accuses Turning Point of “promoting hate speech and inciting violence against our community.” Professors, including Tia Kolbaba, an associate professor of religion at Rutgers, reportedly signed it.
These faculty members and students are demonstrating the same intolerance that long ago changed higher education into the ideological echo chamber it has become on the left.
Neither side is prepared to tolerate opposing views, and both believe that their rage is righteous, whereas the rage on the other side is dangerous.
Drawing the line on free speech rights is often a difficult one. In my book, “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage,” I argue for universities to focus on conduct rather than the content of speech. Occupying buildings, harassing students, destroying property, and shouting down speakers are forms of conduct that should be subject to suspension or expulsion.
Another professor this week has also raised questions over off-campus conduct. Elias Cepeda, a journalist and English Professor at Northeastern Illinois University, was arrested with a loaded firearm and a large amount of ammunition outside of the ICE facility in Broadview, Illinois, the scene of violent protests.
Cepeda is a suspected Antifa member and has social posts calling ICE Nazis and calling for armed resistance. In response to Homeland Security posting about an incident of ICE officers being attacked by a man with a weed whacker, Cepeda responded, “First of all, the video you just posted showed your Nazi asses are lying. Secondly, we’d all be morally justified in taking your Nazi heads off with weed whackers.”
He recently declared, “There are things worse than a civil war.”
He has called for teachers to come armed to school to defend students from any ICE officers who show up. He then showed up armed at an ICE facility. He was later released.
If Cepeda committed a crime at the facility or made criminal threats, his conduct can and should be the basis for termination by the university. It is not clear what, if any, charges might be brought in the case.
Meanwhile, constitutional protections for speech do not mean that speech should not be condemned. This week, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer supported the “No Kings” protests and declared that people should be “forcefully rising up.” Commentators like former CNN host Don Lemon called on minorities to get guns so that they can defend themselves against federal law enforcement officers.
This speech is knowingly inflammatory at a time of rising political violence. They are the same voices that we have heard in every “age of rage.” But that is the price that we pay for free speech.
The costs of the path chosen by many at Rutgers, however, are far higher. Yielding to our anger will place us on the slippery slope of censorship. We can survive with Bray teaching at Rutgers. We cannot survive without free speech.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. He is the author of the bestselling book “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”
“. . . ‘Anti-Fascist’ (what Antifa stands for).”
I see that Antifa has hired itself a PR firm.
If that firm practiced truth in advertising, here would be its copy:
Antifa is anti-capitalist and anti-American. It uses violence to achieve its political goal — communism.
My grandfather served in the U.S. military during World War Two and back then the United States was “Anti-Fascist” (what Antifa stands for).
My great-grandmother served during WW2 in the Civilian Observer Corp – spotting fascist enemy aircraft on the East and West Coasts of the USA – fighting fascism.
You can disagree or oppose any group operating illegally or violating the U.S. Constitution, but the goal of Antifa (to defeat fascism) is as American as apple pie and the 4th of July.
Mark Bray is a historian of Modern Spain and the World, focusing on politics, human rights, and transnational history. He earned his BA in Philosophy with High Honors from Wesleyan University in 2005 and his PhD in History from Rutgers University in 2016.
He has published four books, including the national best-seller Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook (Melville House 2017), which is the first transnational history of postwar anti-fascism and has been translated into seven languages. His most recent book, The Anarchist Inquisition: Assassins, Activists, and Martyrs in Spain and France (Cornell 2022), explores groundbreaking transnational human rights campaigns that emerged in response to a brutal wave of repression unleashed by the Spanish state to quash anarchist activities at the turn of the twentieth century and is based on research in Spanish, Catalan, French, and Italian from twenty-four archives in Spain, France, England, the United States and the Netherlands. Bray is the co-editor and translator of Anarchist Education and the Modern School: A Francisco Ferrer Reader (PM Press 2018), the first definitive English-language collection of the works of early twentieth century Catalan pedagogue and revolutionary Francisco Ferrer. He is also the author of Translating Anarchy: The Anarchism of Occupy Wall Street (Zero 2013), a historically grounded, socio-political analysis of the Occupy Wall Street movement based on 192 interviews with organizers in NYC that has been translated into Spanish and French. He has presented his work in English and Spanish among public and scholarly audiences across North America, Latin America, and Europe, and has appeared on major national and international media outlets including Meet the Press, BBC World News, CNN International, PBS and many others to discuss his expertise on the history of anti-fascism, social movements, and European and American politics.
“Plagiarism:” “Presenting work or ideas from another source as your own, with or without consent of the original author.”
Well said Mr. Bray …..
Bray-ay-ay-ing like a (D)onkey.
In 2019 ANTIFA becam part of DSA. The goal of both groups is to destroy our REPUBLIC. How can you defend such a goup and their members?
It seems to me that Prof. Bray and TPUSA are braying at each other. This is America! Let us rejoice. Students who seek to be brayed at by Prof. Bray should be able to do so but one does question the legitimacy of the course credits and I hope that he does not offer a required course.
Complete JOBS time freedom and income are in front of you. (fc416) This activity is just fantastic. Every individual can makes profits on-line with google without difficulty….
TAB now___
great
How come then, did the United States find it justifiable to execute the editor of a magazine, because of the things that he wrote? Heck, the kindly older gentleman even wrote a children’s book!
I don’t believe that inciting violence is protected speech.
👍
Seeing them around ice facilities makes me believe they really believe what they are saying. Some of these people should be in jail to protect the public. It’s only a matter of time before someone is killed. Treating antifa like a social club would be too our detriment.
Yes, in regarding Bray, it’s one thing to say you support antifa it’s another thing to call on their members to pursue violence against so-called white supremacist. To me that’s crossing the line from free speech into calling for violence.
Computers don’t have free speech or press.
Computer generated AI
It’s so bad having to listen to this I’m sorry I was ever born. Incredible losers
“Bray is now on the receiving end of a blind rage exactly like what Antifa has been unleashing against its targets for decades.” Sounds like a goose/gander situation. What exactly is the problem with Karma visiting Bray? Is this not an appropriate reap what you sow moment? Why is Turning Point and like-minded individuals required to perpetually ‘turn the other cheek’, Professor?
As a Constitutionalist I support Professor Bray in his speech. What I do not support and the Constitution clearly does not support is the violent overthrow of the Government of the United States. Mr. Bray advocates that overthrow!!!! Therefore, he is an enemy of the United States and should be indicted on Sedition and material support of Terrorism.
What part of his book advocates for the overthrow of the US government?
I don’t think that part exists.
If cigarette and gun manufacturers can be held accountable for the damages caused by their products, then Bray can be held responsible for damages of his politicization of students and his cookbook.
Please cite where he advocates for the overthrow of the US government and cite his own words please .
Otherwise you are slandering the prof
Turley whips up rage in this push piece. What’s all this about toilet paper USA?
Bray believes that “physical violence against white supremacists is both ethically justifiable and strategically effective.”
JT concluded: “I was disappointed, therefore, when the Rutgers TPUSA members called for the firing of Bray.”
I completely disagree.
There is only one civilized method for settling disputes — by reason, which means by persuasion, debate, arguments. Here we have an academic (read barbarian) openly calling for the use of physical force to settle disputes.
That creature should be in a place where there are no zip codes.
“ There is only one civilized method for settling disputes — by reason, which means by persuasion, debate, arguments.”
You can’t reason with Fascists. They are against debate. They are against free speech. Trying to reason with a fascist is like trying to convince a religious zealot he/she is wrong. Questioning their views are seen as blasphemous and we all know what they would prefer to do with those who commit blasphemy and it’s not debate.
The definition of “fascism” …….. Oh, how the struggle goes on for those that don’t even realize what they’re saying.
Characteristics of facism:
1. Powerful, often exclusionary, populist nationalism centered on cult of a redemptive, “infallible” leader who never admits mistakes.
2. Political power derived from questioning reality, endorsing myth and rage, and promoting lies.
3. Fixation with perceived national decline, humiliation, or victimhood.
4. White Replacement “Theory” used to show that democratic ideals of freedom and equality are a threat. Oppose any initiatives or institutions that are racially, ethnically, or religiously harmonious.
5. Disdain for human rights while seeking purity and cleansing for those they define as part of the nation.
6. Identification of “enemies”/scapegoats as a unifying cause. Imprison and/or murder opposition and minority
group leaders.
7. Supremacy of the military and embrace of paramilitarism in an uneasy, but effective collaboration with traditional elites. Fascists arm people and justify and glorify violence as “redemptive”.
8. Rampant sexism.
9. Control of mass media and undermining “truth”.
10. Obsession with national security, crime and punishment, and fostering a sense of the nation under attack.
11. Religion and government are intertwined.
12. Corporate power is protected and labor power is suppressed.
13. Disdain for intellectuals and the arts not aligned with the fascist narrative.
14. Rampant cronyism and corruption. Loyalty to the leader is paramount and often more important than competence.
15. Fraudulent elections and creation of a one-party state.
16. Often seeking to expand territory through armed conflict
https://www.keene.edu/academics/cchgs/resources/presentation-materials/characteristics-and-appeal-of-fascism/download/
The Trump administration is firing on all cylinders of the above.
Anon, you use computers a lot, right? How many hours per day for how many years? From childhood?
Your brain algorithms are now faulty. They’ve synced with AI. You’ll believe whatever it says.
I’m sorry
“Characteristics of facism [sic]:”
Nice shopping list.
Next time try an explanation of fascism’s essence.
And use spell check. It’s spelled “fascism.”
DREAM ON! If you make accusations you should provide evidence. I don’t think there is evidence for your accusations. Can you name the what territory is being taken by force! The only thing Donald Trump has in common with Mussolini is surviving assassination attempts. Nancy Pelosi fit more closely with Mussolini. I wish Umberto Eco could speak directly to you about fascism. But he is dead!
ATS – this is your definition of Fascism.
It is NOT the definition of fascism.
Mussolini the founder of Fascism defined it as
Everything inside the state
nothing outside the state
nothing against the state.
That definition perfectly fits the left.
“1. Powerful, often exclusionary, populist nationalism centered on cult of a redemptive, “infallible” leader who never admits mistakes.”
You mean like Clinton or Harris or especially Obama ?
“2. Political power derived from questioning reality, endorsing myth and rage, and promoting lies.”
Again sounds like the left.
Need I provide the long long list of issues in which the left has lived in an alternative reality ?
The collusion delusion, the russian disinformation nonsense. Bidens corruption, Biden’s competence. Pretty much everything about covid.
“3. Fixation with perceived national decline, humiliation, or victimhood.”
Absolutely the left.
What political groups core reason for existing is ranting about righting humiliation or victiminzation – often that occured a century before they were born ?
Left wing identity politics is a heiarachy of victimhood – the more victim points you have the higher int he hierarchy you are.
“4. White Replacement “Theory” ”
Left wing claptrap. First every culture in existance seeks its own self preservation.
“to show that democratic ideals of freedom and equality are a threat.”
It is the left that is the actual threat to the ideal of freedom.
Quite literally we are NOT equal – ANY conception of equality beyond legal equality before the law is GUARANTEED to destroy society.
This is the core flaw of the french revolution, of communism, of socialism.
We are not all equal and efforts to try to accomplish that require masive amounts of force and always result in copious bloodshed.
“Oppose any initiatives or institutions that are racially, ethnically, or religiously harmonious.”
There is a difference between an initiative and an institution.
Regardless you are free to support or oppose any institution or initiative you wish.
What you may NOT do is impose your will on others by FORCE
Again it is the left that seeks that not the right.
“5. Disdain for human rights while seeking purity and cleansing for those they define as part of the nation.”
Where in the world do you live ? You are disconnected from reality ?
There is no consequential group in the US that seeks “purity” or “cleansing”.
There is no consequential group outside the left that seeks to violate “human rights”
“6. Identification of “enemies”/scapegoats as a unifying cause. Imprison and/or murder opposition and minority group leaders.”
Papadolulis, Flynn, Manafort, Van Zander, Bannon, Navaro, Stone, Trump, charlie kirk
Catholics, those who are pro-life, parents seeking answers at school board meetings.
These are the people that YOU have identified as enemies/scapegoats, that you have persecuted, imprisoned murdered.
“7. Supremacy of the military and embrace of paramilitarism in an uneasy, but effective collaboration with traditional elites. Fascists arm people and justify and glorify violence as “redemptive”.”
Where do you live ? Neither the left nor the right today are seeking military supremacy.
The only people advocating for violence – are those on the left.
And the closest thing we have to a consequential paramilitary threat is Antifa
“8. Rampant sexism.”
The place of women in the movement is on their backs – Eldridge cleaver.
The left has universally sought to appeal to women while concurrently demeaning and abusing them.
Today left wing nuts elevate MTF Trans over actual women, destroying all the domains that we have created that were exclusively for women.
The most sexist ideology in existance has always been the left.
“9. Control of mass media and undermining “truth”.”
The mass media has been controlled by the left my entire life.
Today it is slowly dying on its own – specifically because it does not speak the truth and people are not as stupid as left wing nuts beleive.
“10. Obsession with national security, crime and punishment, and fostering a sense of the nation under attack.”
Here you are ranting that there is some faux fascist threat from the left while trying to claim it is the Right that is paranoid ?
America is not perfect – but it is doing fine – despite your nonsense.
We have past peak woke – your idiocy is being tossed int he dustbin of history.
We are moving forward rather than backward again.
We have some problems with crime – something we were doing very well on for 40 years until the left started idiotically trying to ruin what was working.
The only attack on the nation is from violent left wing nuts, but they are being dealt with – mostly fairly easily.
“11. Religion and government are intertwined.”
The left is a religious cult – and govenment is their church.
While there appears to be a small religious resurgance – particularly among the young in this country – it does not at the moment appear to be significant. It does not appear at the moment to be a resurgence of christian fundimentalism.
More a recognition that the ideology of the left – its false gods and false promises is unappealing and unrewarding.
But this is not some huge mass movement and does not involve govenment.
“12. Corporate power is protected and labor power is suppressed.”
In what reality do you live ? I am not sure whether democrats own corportate power or corporate power owns democrats – regardless – the right is completely divorced from corporate power and the wealthy in a way that has never been true before in this country.
Conversely republicans have completely shifted their focus to labor, to the working class, and as a result working class voters are swarming to the GOP.
“13. Disdain for intellectuals and the arts not aligned with the fascist narrative.”
The right has a disdain for liars. Those who have shilled nonsense on people.
The arts is not and never has been the legitimate business of government.
Creative people – like ALL OTHER GROUPS should be respected for their accomplishments – not their views on unrelated things.
I have enormous respect for the acting and entertainment skills of most of hollywood.
I care no more about their opinions on government than I do on their views on dentistry or building construction.
As to intellectuals – we should respect actual accomplishments. Those who have bet heavily on their ideas and succeeded. While those who think that education alone is a grant of authority or credibility – learned nothing in their ivory towers.
“14. Rampant cronyism and corruption. Loyalty to the leader is paramount and often more important than competence.”
Do you live in reality ? Throughout the nation – those on the left control nearly all the institutions – the media is dominate by the left, academia is dominated by the left, govenrment is dominated by the left – where exactly is it that you think right wing cronyism and corruption are occuring.
“15. Fraudulent elections and creation of a one-party state.”
That was the goal of the left – it has backfired.
Nature abhors a vaccuum – at some point hopefully soon the democratic party will regain its senses, because if it does not its failures will leave the country with a one party state for a long time. But that is the consequence of democrat failures, not efforts by republicans.
As to fraudulent elections – I though claiming fraud with respect to an election is sedition and insurrection ?
“16. Often seeking to expand territory through armed conflict”
Where are US troops deployed today ?
Which is why we need to expel fascists like Bray
This is your list and why are you afraid of him? It’s only words. Afraid of the truth?
He needs med treatment. It’s very serious.
“You can’t reason with” (fill in the blank)
If you reach that point, a civilized person goes his separate way. A barbarian demands violence.
You can not reason with left wing nuts.
Regardless, that is why the social contract exists. That is why we ceded to government our right to initiate the use of force.
When some individuals – or group – regardless of whether you label them fascists, or left wing nuts chooses to initiate force rather than persuasion to accomplish their wishes – we call that CRIME, and Government is empowered to use FORCE to punish crime.
That is what the rule of law means.
X
Whether you label them fascist or left wing nut we are ALL free to refuse to be reasoned with,
that too is a part of being actually free.
You are NOT entitled to REQUIRE others to agree with your views, your policies, your whims – no matter how reasonable you think your arguments are.
You have 3 legitimate choices:
Attempt to persuade
Go your separate ways
Or impose your will by force using government.
The latter is severely restricted.
You can not use FORCE – whether through govenrment or yourself to violate the fundimental rights of others.
You can not use FORCE when the goal can be accomplished without FORCE.
You can not use FORCE when the goal is not an existential necessity.
Put more simply 99.99% of the time, your options are limited to persuade or disagree.
Sam, it’s his “belief” that violence is the answer, but a ” belief” is not a criminal action. There is no “True Threat” to anyone. I don’t like his” “beliefs” anymore than you do, but IMO it’s protected First Amendment Free 🆓 Speech. Let him voice his hate to the public, and lets see which side the public comes down on, and we both know how that’s going to come out, that’s the American way…👍👍👍
Do you believe it is appropriate for a University to employ a professor who teaches his students that violence against those that disagree with his radical views is not only acceptable, but desirable?
Not appropriate at all. Today I heard on NPA (I listen to keep up with what they are lying about) a survey about percentages of Democrats and Republicans who believe that violence will be required to restore balance in American government. I found it so very strange that the survey said that more Republicans thought violence would be necessary because Charlie Kirk was violently assassinated and there were two attempted assassinations on Donald Trump.
WTF do you think he’s been doing? His Anarchists Handbook has provided a recipe for disruption and propagation of some Constitutional Republic overthrow garbage through violence to impressionable young college students. Let him be on the receiving end of his own beliefs which include losing his livelihood, and his freedom if determined to be involved with the domestic terrorist Antifa movement. Just like the idiot Democrat running in Virginia, it’s all good calling for someone else’s family to die, different story when it’s your own.
“. . . it’s protected First Amendment Free 🆓 Speech.”
This is not an issue of free speech. It’s an issue of professional responsibility. A college professor is supposed to practice and teach the life of the mind. His call for violence is the antithesis of academia’s fundamental purpose.
Civilized method of settling disputes:
Single shot pistols at 20 paces!
Were not Burr & Hamilton civilized?
Agreed
Let these idiots kill each other, amnesty day for dueling!
They do now at a rate of 50 per weekend, Chicago
Send more ammunition
Maybe we should revise April Fools Day. We could call it “no demented old fool day”. Of course you know the demented old fool I am talking about.
“Single shot pistols at 20 paces!”
20 paces might have been civilized because they probably would’ve missed.
10 paces, their actual distance, was not.