Speaking Freely

 

I just read an article in USA Today about Salmon Rushdie deciding not to speak at a college commencement because of opposition against him from Palestinian supporters. He had recently commented on the protesters here in American believing that it’s “problematic” for student movements to support Hamas, a known terrorist organization. Because of this, the supporters at this university shut him down. Rushdie has been a long-time advocate of a Palestinian state. He’s also spoken out against what’s happening in Gaza. He’s not the enemy of these protesters. But he feels they are on shaky grounds when support turns to Hamas.  In the past, people of differing opinions could come to universities and share their opinions without fear of reprisal. If all views are aired, people can form an educated opinion. Today differing opinions are strongly, even violently, discouraged.

America’s Freedom of Speech used to mean all opinions could openly be shared. As long as the speakers were not pushing violence (and sometimes even when they did), they were free to share their views. Certainly not everything we wish to say can be shared freely. We cannot yell “fire” in a crowded space. Hate speech can be shut down. But most of what we wish to say is covered by our right to freedom of speech, or was. 

With the rise of social media, under the opportunity to not be face to face, people have become bolder and bolder at pushing their agendas, often at the expense of their opponent’s humanity. We wish to erase all things we disagree with, and label the people who speak dissent as dangerous or bad or stupid. Today people are deciding not to weigh in with their opinion for fear of losing their job, friends, family. We don’t have to agree to disagree anymore, we just have to censure those we disagree with. May the loudest voice win.

The current administration leads the way. Harvard University is standing its ground regarding the government’s demand they toe a certain line or lose their funding. Harvard drew a line in the sand. This over diversity, equality and inclusion. Apparently the government sees finding ways to even the playing field for people who are not white, middleclass Americans, as racist.  So speech and practices that wish to help less fortunate Americans, often people of color, get equal opportunity is squelched. White people are being prejudiced against. Oh my, how awful.

I say that because I believe there is such a thing as “white privilege”. Statistically in America, white people hold the most of everything. Heaven forbid anyone else would get a fairer share of the American dream. White America feels afraid they might lose some of their privilege. More and more you hear comments about seeing more people of color represented on TV or in movies. Instead of celebrating that our country is being more diverse, we call it “racism” and seek to stop it. 

Whatever racism and discrimination white America has experienced pales in comparison to what every non-white (and often times non-white-non-male) have experienced. So when organizations seek more equality for people of color, white America shouts “racism”.  Diversity, equality and inclusion programs, created to equal the playing field for non-white Americans, are now deemed racists and wrong. Support of those programs is punished by removal of funding, or loss of employment.  Speaking out in favor of equality for all is shut down. The right to even speak one’s opinion on the subject is in jeopardy.   

What happened to our right to speak our mind, express our opinion? Why am I to be censored if my view doesn’t agree with yours? What made your opinion weigh more than mine? Why can’t we both share what we believe? If what you believe is what you believe, what difference does my disagreeing make? If you are “right”, my expressing my “wrongness” shouldn’t bother you at all. But apparently it does.

So a college graduating class missed out on the experience of hearing Salmon Rushdie because he’d expressed an opinion a loud group of protesters didn’t agree with. No one was stopping them from protesting and sharing their opinions. But they made Mr. Rushdie feel afraid (after all, he has experienced a physical attack by someone who disagreed with his beliefs. Who can blame him for choosing to not put himself in that position again). Why were the protesters threatened by Mr. Rushdie? Whatever he planned to say at the ceremony might have shown he agrees with them more than he disagrees. We will never know, because a group of people felt it was better to stop him from speaking then take the risk of hearing his words.