>A small number of Nazis protest somewhere, usually under the guise of freely expressing their opinions, and the police protect them under a mandate of upholding the First Amendment. By bolstering the narrative that speech should be protected at all costs, the police help smuggle white supremacist thought, policy, and action into the mainstream.
>What I’ve found through my research and reporting is that free speech has become a rhetorical tool to elide something much more sinister: the state’s support and protection of white supremacists, and this country’s unwillingness to grapple with its racism.
>I’ve been disheartened to see not only conservatives and fascists but also liberals criticizing those who protest against the free speech rights of the most vile groups in America.
>Their argument usually harks back to the oft-misattributed quote: “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” Their reasoning makes clear that most of the USA has a deep misunderstanding of what free speech means.
>The billion-dollar investment in what is essentially right-wing propaganda has worked: We no longer think of free speech logically or accurately. Is a college protest over a conservative speaker really a violation of free speech? What about the college students’ right to protest—is that not as important a free speech issue? Colleges are already some of the most restrictive speech environments in the world, deciding who can enter the campus via an admissions process, what gets taught in every classroom, and who gets to teach it.
>Is my rejection from UC Berkeley a free speech violation? I might disagree with their decision, but no, it’s not. I don’t expect to be invited to conservative Christian universities, and I don’t view that as a violation of my free speech either. Why should conservatives expect an open invitation wherever they please?
thenation.com
Do you agree Yas Forums?
