Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Being offended is what happens when you have your deepest beliefs challenged. And if you make it through four years of college without having your deepest beliefs challenged, you should demand your money back.
I have been saying that in speeches on campus for more than a decade. Even though the line often gets a laugh, the idea that students have a “right not to be offended” seems more entrenched on campus than ever.
Take the most recent high-profile example: At the University of California-Santa Barbara (UCSB), a professor not only seized a graphic anti-abortion sign from protesters, she got into a physical altercation with them and then proceeded to go back to her office to destroy the sign. Now that the video of the incident has emerged and the police report has been published, things are really looking bad for professor Mireille Miller-Young: she now faces vandalism, battery, and robbery charges.
I just wish I found the incident the slightest bit surprising. While my organization, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), proudly defends anyone who gets in trouble for his or her speech on college campuses all across the political spectrum —and in many cases it has nothing to do with politics — I make no secret of the fact that students are more likely to get in trouble for socially conservative speech. A case in point is currently taking place at my alma mater, Stanford, where a group that opposes gay marriage has been told that a conference it was planning to have is “hate speech,” and that it needs to pay $5,600 for “security” if it wishes to have the event.
And when it comes to the trend of students and faculty members taking it upon themselves to engage in vigilante censorship, the target is often socially conservative speech, especially speech against abortion.
The UCSB incident is eerily similar to a 2006 incident at Northern Kentucky University involving professor Sally Jacobsen, who urged her class to “to express their freedom-of-speech rights to destroy [a pro-life] display if they wished to.” She then proceeded to lead her class to destroy the display. (I’ve included pictures of the incident in the new paperback edition of my book.)
Another incident that was caught on video was that of University of Wisconsin–Stevens Point student government member Roderick King tearing up an anti-abortion display on his campus. King seemed even more confused on the concept of free speech than Jacobsen, declaring: “Since [abortion] is a right, you don’t have the right to challenge it.” And then there was this incident out of Missouri State University, in which a student proudly defends her trampling of crosses in yet another pro-life display, saying, “I feel like I have the right to walk across campus without seeing that.” These last three pro-life displays, by the way, were little more than collections of little white crosses.
Adding to this list of shame, FIRE just released a video featuring the story of student Robert Smith at Dartmouth College. In 2012, one of his fellow students hated his campus pro-life display so much that he actually ran over it with his car right in front of the student organizers. (This display was American flags, not crosses.) Not only was this move crazy and dangerous, it came with an ironic twist: the car had a “Coexist” bumper sticker on the back.
Incidents like this are part of the reason that the title of my book (just released in paperback) is Unlearning Liberty: Campus Censorship and the End of American Debate. By “unlearning liberty,” we at FIRE generally mean that colleges and the environments they have established are teaching students all the wrong lessons about what it means to live in a free society. For instance, this March, we are once again seeing the opening of what FIRE has dubbed “disinvitation season”: a now-yearly ritual in which students and faculty members band together to try to deny a place at their colleges to commencement speakers whose opinions they dislike.
Americans should be alarmed that students and even faculty members (who should know better) are turning away from critical thinking and reasoned debate, and instead learning to think like censors. It’s bad enough that 59% of campuses maintain unconstitutional speech codes; it’s also unacceptable that so many students meekly accept when they are told they need to limit their protests to the tiny free speech zone on campus. But it’s far, far worse when students come to believe that censorship is what good and noble people just do.
Censorship has always been the easy way out, the way of imposing one’s view against the challenge of pluralism — but if a generation of students comes to see the well—intentioned censor as a romantic hero, it will have terrible consequences for us all.