Two Sides of the Fence:

Violence and Offensive

Speech on Campus
Molly Cross
April 12, 2018
Speech on Campus
What and Who Does it Affect?
April 10th, 2018:
The National Center for Institutional Diversity
Campus Inclusion and Free Expression: A Conversation with Higher
Education Leaders [PANEL]

“The Anti-Defamation League report[ed] a spike in white supremacist propaganda on college

campuses, and asked the panel how institutions should address such problems without
alienating students or faculty...DeGioia stated universities cannot use the protection of the
First Amendment as justification for remaining silent on hateful behavior. Espinosa agreed,
saying universities can implement strategies such as counterprogramming, which is the
scheduling of alternative activities for students during other, potentially upsetting events on
campus. She said administrations need to be proactive and anticipate speech and
identity-related conflicts.”
Downs, 2004
“Many FSM activists yearned for an intense educational experience that moved the mind and the
soul. But their commitment to solidarity, comrade ship, and organic community also contained
elements that could smother individual independence of mind. Before long, part of the FSM ideal
led to an insistence on the “right politics” rather than to freedom as a means to attain knowledge
and individualistic self-discovery.” (Downs 7)

“Preference falsification means “the act of misrepresenting one’s genuine wants under perceived
social pressures.” Through preference falsification, people suppress their true preferences, thereby
compromising their human dignity and the process by which truth and social change are forged.
“The status quo, once sustained because people were afraid to challenge it, will thus come to
persist because no one understands its flaws or can imagine a better alternative.” (Downs 24)
Free Speech or Hate Speech?
Gallup-Knight Foundation Report (2018)

“U.S. college students show strong support for the

First Amendment, but favor some restrictions on free
speech rights to foster an environment where diverse
perspectives are respected.”

“Students (54 percent) are more likely to think the

climate on their campus prevents people from
speaking their mind because others might take
offense. While a majority of college students, 69
percent, believe political conservatives are able to
freely express their views on campus, many more
Silent counter-protester, freshman Stephanie Black, at
believe political liberals (92 percent) and other campus Milo Yiannopoulos’s 2016 lecture at American
groups are able to share their opinions freely.” University.
Trends of Speech on Campus
Gallup Study found four significant changes on American college campuses from
2016-2018:

● Students support free speech, but many are willing to entertain restrictions
and prioritize inclusion over expression.
● Students are less confident in the security of First Amendment rights
● Students increasingly see downsides for free expression on social media
● Student trust in the press has increased, but is divided along political and race
lines
Milo Yiannopoulos
The Far Right
Milo Yiannopoulos
● “I want the whole world to be like an
Internet comment section.”
● Born in Kent, England
● Practicing Catholic
● Jewish (?) (only when accused)
● Gay w/ Muslim Partner
● Dropped out of Univ. of Manchester
& Cambridge
● Survivor of child abuse.
● Avid Trump supporter
● Resigned from Breitbart in February
of 2018 Milo Yiannopoulos’s 2016 lecture at American
University.
Patron Engagement & Protests
Counter-protester, Noah Leibowitz, outside Milo
Yiannopoulos’s 2016 lecture at American University.

Milo Yiannopoulos spoke at UC Berkeley, but only to a small crowd

and for about 25 minutes. Here he holds signs made by supporters.
Photo: Roger Jones
Scandals, Cancellations, & Costs
Chelsea Manning
The Far Left
Chelsea Manning
● Trans woman
● Advocate of queer and transgender rights
● Political whistleblower
● Been sentenced for 35 years
● Former President Obama commuted her
sentence
● Released in May, 2017
● Currently running for Senate in Maryland
Invited and Disinvited by Harvard Kennedy School
Harvard's Explanation & Criticism It Received
“But I see more clearly now that many people view a Visiting Fellow title as an honorific, so we
should weigh that consideration when offering invitations. In particular, I think we should weigh,
for each potential visitor, what members of the Kennedy School community could learn from that
person’s visit against the extent to which that person’s conduct fulfills the values of public
service to which we aspire.”
(Dean of Kennedy School)
Harvard's Explanation & Criticism It Received

“Mr. Morell, for example, has steadfastly refused to admit that the C.I.A. engaged in torture,
even in the face of the Senate’s damning torture report released in 2014. When asked about
the agency’s decision to conduct forced “rectal feeding” on a detainee, he refused to answer
whether that amounted to torture. Mr. Morell has also been an outspoken cheerleader for
indiscriminate C.I.A. drone strikes that have killed at least hundreds of civilians. He most
recently made headlines when he told Charlie Rose the United States should be ‘killing
Russians and Iranians’ — two countries the United States is not at war with — in Syria.”
(Trevor Timm)
Conclusions and Further
Thoughts
 Pros and Cons of Controversial Speakers
PROS
● Controversial speech can be a catalyst for
change across campus by bring
awareness to an issue
● Controversial speech allows for intelligent
rebuttal and dissemination of
counter-views.
● Allows for the education of the other side
in order to understand how to debate the
opposing side, one must learn the
platform.
CONS
● Dangerous Rhetoric
● “Superseding the ‘cultivation of intellectual
freedoms’” (Downs 8)
● Controversial Speech often becomes
synonymous with hate speech
● Allocation of student funds to dangerous
ideals.
● Perceived detriment to reputation
Albert Lepawsky
“After all, the university’s prime mission resides not in political activity but in the
cultivation of the intellectual freedoms. it is imperative that no one facet of the
university’s activities, certainly not the political, should dominate its overall
responsibilities for the cultivation of the intellect any conflict between the
intellectual and political way of life must be resolved in favor of the primacy of the
intellectual over the political”

(Downs 8)
An Alternative Approach

Free Speech as An Abstract Value

Institutions

Free Speech as Concrete Laws/ Regulations/ Codes

Conclusionary Questions & Debates
Q1: Should controversial speakers, specifically those such as Milo Yiannopoulos, be invited to speak on
campus?

Q2: Should campuses (and students) bear the costs to host controversial speakers for speaking costs,
security costs, etc.?

[Q1 ≈ Q2]

Q3: Why is it important to know the difference between hate speech and free speech on campuses?

Q4: What is the criteria for differentiating hate speech from controversial speech, and why are the two
so frequently interchangeable?

Q5: What are the roles played by institutions when they concretize the abstract ideas/ values?
THANK YOU !