“Any university’s strength stems not from its raw exercise of power but from its commitment to candor, free speech and rigorous critique of ideas.”- Richard B Kuhns
When I wrote for my pharmacy school paper, I was allowed to express opinions, which were often unpopular to say the least. Unfortunately, this has not been the case at every college newspaper in the country. Consider what happened at the University of California-Berkeley over ten years ago, which many consider to be the liberal headquarters of the academic world.
David Horowitz, a conservative author, wrote an article about the demand for slavery reparations and what a foolish idea he thought it was. Angered by Mr. Horowitz’s article, students broke into the offices of the school paper, trashed the place, yelled at and intimidated the staff, and then stole all editions of the paper containing the article. He was accused of racism, and the money he was to be paid for the article went to appease the militants on campus. So, what is the problem you ask? If someone writes something like that then why not punish him accordingly?
First, let’s go over some basic principles. Censorship is warranted in certain circumstances such as for any use of gratuitous profanity, or if an attempt is made to instill others to commit violence. Censorship is not warranted if what is written is simply not in line with what the majority believes, or if it merely hurts people’s feelings. Malik Zulu Shabazz, leader of the Black Panther Party, once gave a speech where he said some of the most ridiculously anserine things I have ever heard, but he has that right. I only wish the liberal media would have given his imbecilic speech more exposure. That is the cost of having the freedom of speech. Admittedly there are limits, but Mr. Horowitz certainly did not cross them in this case. In fact, the vast majority of polled Americans (90%) shared Mr. Horowitz’s sentiment.
Secondly, to quote Mr. Horowitz himself, “Nothing can be more inimical to the educational spirit than the physical intimidation of dissenting viewpoints.” It is disgraceful not to run an ad because certain people on a college campus are going to disagree with it. Nowhere is it more appropriate to have an open forum available for the discussion/debate of varied ideas and beliefs than at an institution of higher learning. Also, not every opposing idea nor constructive criticism is an assault.
Liberals today are way too sensitive, paranoid, and panicked. If you simply disagree with them not only will they demonize you as a hate-filled extremist, but they will also accuse you of “attacking” them. They love that word. They also love to portray themselves as victims, and often divide the world up into oppressors and the oppressed. Once again, this is another manifestation of the emphasis on feelings over thought. It seems many of them actually believe that they have the right not to be offended. They ought to know that being exposed to discomforting ideas is one of the prices of freedom; a freedom we are very fortunate to have in this country!
It is absurdly ridiculous and futile to attempt to tiptoe through life trying to never offend anyone. I could just see liberal parents telling their kid that he cannot dress up as the Hunchback of Notre Dame because it is insensitive to people with spinal deformities, or that he cannot listen to Sinead O’Connor because they feel that her look is insensitive to chemotherapy patients. See the picture here? Think I am exaggerating?
Well, what do you say when cops from the LAPD are told they cannot wear “9-11” pins on their uniforms because it “may offend someone”, or when firefighters around the country are told that they cannot drive around with American Flags displayed because it may cause a riot, or when a city employee is fired for possibly “offending someone” because he insists on having an American Flag present and saying the Pledge of Allegiance before a city meeting (when both are required in the first place), or when employees at their workplace are told to take the miniature American Flags off of their cubicles for fear of “offending someone”, or news reporters refuse to show any patriotism because they do not want to be regarded as biased.
It is all a big steaming pile of horse manure. It is hard to imagine what goes on inside the heads of these “politically correct” liberals who continue to practice overzealous compassion that is completely nonsensical; it certainly is not clear thinking. Political correctness (or political vogueness as some call it) is, in the words of Bradford Wilson of the National Association of Scholars, “fatuous nonsense”.
Lastly, look at the extreme liberal viewpoint which has “hijacked” much of the media. There is a blatant hypocritical aspect to their philosophy that makes me want to spew forth a vomitous mass that would earn Linda Blaire’s respect. Debra Saunders, a columnist, described them well when she said, “The people who preach tolerance become the most intolerant when you disagree with them.” Many libs turn meaner than a wolverine on PCP when confronted by a conservative.
Look at the supercilious demeanor of Katie Couric on the Today Show (CBS) when she interviews politicians like Newt Gingrich or Sarah Palin. Her look of disdain would send the Grim Reaper running. Did anyone see the despicable behavior of Hillary Clinton at President Bush’s address to Congress just after the Sept. 11th attacks? Anyone remember not so long ago when Republican’s were shamelessly being accused of wanting to: starve children, prevent the elderly from getting their medicine, pollute the air and water, etc., etc. These tactics are illogical, spineless, and shameless.
If you mention Rush Limbaugh’s name they begin to retch. They refuse to even listen to him. My contention is that most of them have never listened; they just know that they hate him (emotion strikes again). If they only tried listening, they may be surprised as to how much sense he makes. They may even find themselves in a position where they would not only begin to question their own ideology, but would positively be unable to defend his rebukes of it. Logical reasoning is hard to contend with. Bill O’Reilly is the poster boy for this.
Bottom line is this, freedom of speech is not as common as one would think in this country. Berkeley has a long history of censoring opposing viewpoints and quieting those who attempt to express a contrary opinion. Some schools such as Harvard have implemented speech codes! Universities are overrun with liberals who preach colorblindness and acceptance while hypocritically practicing the EXACT opposite. This trend is alarming as is the mental fog in which these people immerse themselves.
