The Commencement Controversy
“It’s difficult for an institution to identify speakers who don’t raise the ire of some group but can still provide a thought-provoking commencement speech,” said Rae Goldsmith, a vice president at the Council for Advancement and Support of Education, an educational association. Some commentators regard student protests against invited speakers as another indicator of the divisiveness of American culture and part of a larger trend of politically correct “orthodoxies” on campuses. Universities are meant to be bastions of open-mindedness and free speech, they say, but are more prone to censoring disagreeable ideas or drowning them out — a practice some have labeled “the heckler’s veto.”
“By giving in to protesters, colleges are denying the majority of students their right to hear controversial opinions and drawing their own conclusions about those opinions,” said Bob Beckel, a Democratic strategist and commentator, in a recent USA Today online debate.
But other free-speech advocates contend that these protests actually represent an increase in free speech and that students should be able to influence campus decisions. The aim of such protests, these advocates say, is not usually to prevent controversial speakers from presenting their ideas but to encourage them to take the microphone at a time other than commencement day.
“This isn’t about tolerance or intolerance,” Mark Schwartz, a Swarthmore alumnus, told the campus newspaper about the successful protests against Mr. Zoellick’s appearance on campus, where he was to receive an honorary degree. “It’s about whether or not you honor somebody within the highest ideals of Swarthmore’s Quaker tradition.”
No comments:
Post a Comment