Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Freedom of speech on college campuses
Freedom of speech on campuses
Essay on free speech on college campuses
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Freedom of speech on college campuses
In a situation that is becoming far too common on college campuses today, a politically conservative speaker was treated differently and held to different standards than other public speakers. In the world of education, college campuses should be places where open-mindedness and freedom to exchange different points of view is the highest priority. Sadly, they have become institutes of one-sided, liberal-leaning, political indoctrination. If social injustice is the “unfair treatment of individuals with differing traits” then why, as a society, have we decided to only treat people fairly if they believe just as we believe? This bias against people with differing political viewpoints is exactly the situation that Ben Shapiro, a political …show more content…
The UC Berkley Chancellor sent equally mixed messages to the student body prior to Mr Shapiro’s speech stating publicly that while the 1st Amendment protects “speech that most of us would find hateful, abhorrent and odious,” that public expression of “sharply divergent points of view is fundamental both to our democracy and to our mission as a university” (UC Berkeley). Instead of telling students what to think, he should just encourage them to think for themselves. This kind of negative approach sets up an expectation of offense and confrontation and in no way encourages the free exchange of diverse points of view. As with the UConn speaking engagement, the university offered counseling to those who felt threatened by what the conservative speaker had to say. These are the same “fragile” students and faculty that in reaction to an upcoming conservative speaker in February of that year, caused over $100,000 in damage to the Berkeley campus by throwing rocks and fireworks at police and lighting several buildings on fire, including their own library (Park and Kyung). This violent protest was before the controversial speaker, Milo Yiannopoulos, even arrived at the location on
Throughout America, people place a high value in their freedom of speech. This right is protected by the first Amendment and practiced in communities throughout the country. However, a movement has recently gained momentum on college campuses calling for protection from words and ideas that may cause emotional discomfort. This movement is driven mainly by students who demand that speech be strictly monitored and punishments inflicted on individuals who cause even accidental offense. Greg Lukianoff and Johnathan Haidt discuss how this new trend affects the students mentally and socially in their article The Coddling of the American Mind published in The Atlantic Monthly. Lukianoff and Haidt mostly use logical reasoning and references to
Although some like Conor Friedersdorf, of the Atlantic, categorized students as “intolerant bullies, (34)” meaning that the reasons for protests were not really reasons at all. Chang argues that the issues students are expressing need to be improved upon as if not, we will continue to go round and round in this vicious cycle. The addition of the apartheid in South Africa backs up Chang’s argument as there is a consensus of it being a serious issue. This explains why he included this piece of history and how it relates to college campuses. Encouraging critics to listen to students, just as Meyer did to those of color, is the only way to prevent today's youth from bring up the same issues in future years. Just as Chang predicted, the next school year brought protesters to hundreds of colleges and universities. What happened at Mizzou was just the beginning of a country wide movement for racial justice on campuses that hasn’t stopped
College is full of new experiences, new people, and new communities, and many universities encourage the exchange of new ideas and diversity among students. This year, the University of Chicago sent out a letter to all of its incoming freshmen informing them that in keeping with their beliefs of freedom of expression and healthy discussion and debate, the school would not provide “safe spaces” or “trigger warnings”. Senior Sophie Downes found this letter to be misleading in many ways, including in the definitions of safe spaces and trigger warnings, as well as the issues it was addressing. Downes claims that the letter was misrepresenting the school, but also was using the letter as a sort
Charles R. Lawrence intended audience in his article “On Racist Speech” is college students and universities. His sense of tone is forthcoming. Lawerence word choice sets the tone by using the words conspicuous,dissenter, and bigot. The article gives examples of how universities do not protect minority college students. Lawrence states that universities should protect their students He also gives an example of how universities have tried to have rules to ban racist speech yet they have proven ineffective in stopping racial slurs. The regulations have not stopped the verbal brutality yet it has stopped the occurrences of physical fights. He mentions how students do not have any need to be hurt verbally.
In the editorial “Coddling of the American Mind,” Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt examine the political correctness on college campuses and how it may be hurting students’ mental health. They explain by allowing campuses to discuss words, ideas, and subjects that can cause discomfort or give offense can provide positive attributes like helping students to produce better arguments and more productive discussions over differences. Does Lukianoff and Haidt provide sufficient evidence about how college campuses should raise attention about the need to balance freedom of speech to help students in their future and education to lead the reader to agree with their argument? The answer is yes,
"Protecting Freedom of Expression on the Campus” by Derek Bok, published in Boston Globe in 1991, is an essay about what we should do when we are faced with expressions that are offensive to some people. The author discusses that although the First Amendment may protect our speech, but that does not mean it protects our speech if we use it immorally and inappropriately. The author claims that when people do things such as hanging the Confederate flag, “they would upset many fellow students and ignore the decent regard for the feelings of others” (70). The author discusses how this issue has approached Supreme Court and how the Supreme Court backs up the First Amendment and if it offends any groups, it does not affect the fact that everyone has his or her own freedom of speech. The author discusses how censorship may not be the way to go, because it might bring unwanted attention that would only make more devastating situations. The author believes the best solutions to these kind of situations would be to
But, amendment one of the constitution says that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech” (First Amendment-Constitution np)... A one-page comic exists where people are utilizing their abilities of freedom of protest and freedom of speech. However, Uncle Sam states that “We're for Democracy, but not this much democracy” (Wasserman np) Sam's quotation meant that the government wants people to have freedoms to communicate their opinions, however, if the opinions of the people conflict with the governments, the government does not want the people to have a right to say anything. Since government gives people the right to say whatever they want whenever they want, people can communicate their opinions regardless of whether or not those opinions agree with the agenda of the government. Uncle Sam's opinion is wrong because the government gives absolute rights of freedom of speech. It cannot pick and choose what they people can and cannot say. Also, Jordan Peterson, psychology professor of the University of Toronto, utilized civil disobedience to communicate his opinion that he did not agree with the university's transgender pronouns. Peterson felt that the university was
Shiell, T. (2009). Campus Hate Speech on Trial. (2nd ed.). Lawrence, KS: University Press of
In recent years, a rise in verbal abuse and violence directed at people of color, lesbians, and gay men, and other historically persecuted groups has plagued the United States. Among the settings of these expressions of intolerance are college and university campuses, where bias incidents have occurred sporadically since the mid-1980's. Outrage, indignation and demands for change are the responses to these incidents - understandably, given the lack of racial and social diversity among students, faculty and administrators on most campuses. Many universities, under pressure to respond to the concerns of those who are the objects of hate, have adopted codes or olicies prhibiting speech that offends any group based on race gender, ethnicity, religion or sexual orientation. That's the wrong response, well-meaning or not. The First Amendment to the United States Constitution protects speech no matter how offensive its content.
Charles R. Lawrence III adresses the matter in his essay “The Debate over Placing Limits on Racist Speech Must Not Ignore the Damage It Does to Its Victims,” by providing the perspective of those on the reciving end. He explains that “racial slurs are particularly undeserving of First Amendment protection because the perpetuator’s intention is not to discover truth or initiate dialoge, but to injure the victim” (628). This argument is justified because some people do take their freedom of speech as far as offending someone because of their race, cultural, and social beliefs. As Cinnamon Stillwell proved in her essay, “Mob Rule on College Campuses,” some students do become bullies when their beliefs are challenged. Stillwell illistrates a situation that occurred at Columbia University when conservative Jim Gilchrist was invited to speak but was unable to because rioting students did not allow him. Stillwell then goes on to say that “Apparently in their minds, niether Gilchrist nor anyone else with whom they disagree has the right to express their viewpoints” (623). This can be applied to both sides because both of them seem to believe that the opposing belief has no right to speak especially when it is controversial. Lawrence mentions that “whenever we decide that racist speech must be tolerated because of the
In the United States, free speech is protected by the First Amendment in which it states, “Congress shall make no laws respecting an establishment of religion … or abridging the freedom of speech.” Now, nearly 250 years into the future, the exact thing that the Founding Fathers were afraid of is starting to happen. Today, our freedom of speech is being threatened through different forces, such as the tyranny of the majority, the protection of the minority, and the stability of the society. Now, colleges and universities in the United States today are also trying to institute a code upon its students that would bar them from exercising their right to speak freely in the name of protecting minorities from getting bullied. This brings us into
College campuses have always been the sites where students can express their opinions without fear. There have been many debates about the merits of allowing free speech on campus. Some students and faculties support allowing free speech on campus, while others believe that colleges should restrict free speech to make the college’s environment safer for every student. Free speeches are endangered on college campuses because of trigger warning, increasing policing of free speech, and the hypersensitivity of college students.
Ben Shapiro is a Jewish conservative blogger that recently spoke at the University of Berkeley back in September. In regards to the topic of the speech, it was about Campus Thuggery but the majority it, he kept referencing to Antifa since they were protesting him speaking at Berkeley. Antifa is protest movement that is against fascism and is known for their violent protests. Within ten minutes or less, he destroyed the Democrats’ argument of free speech. If you draw your attention to the speech itself, it contains myriads of logos, ethos, and pathos.
“Social Justice in Education” by R. W. Connell discusses the role of education in society and the implications that social justice issues have on education. Connell begins by establishing that education and social justice can be examined separately yet they are inescapably linked through the social medium of their implementation. “Education concerns schools, colleges and universities, whose business is to pass knowledge on to the next generation. Social justice is about income, employment, pensions or physical assets like housing.”(Connell, 1993) Three points validating the equal importance of social justice and the education system to people of all delineations are: 1.) in Western society public schools are key forums of social interaction and comprise some of the largest social institutions 2.) educational institutions are highly economic bodies and have become “major public assets” (Connell, 1993) 3.) teaching becomes a vehicle by which society is ultimately determined and has a great influence over society’s morality. Connell describes the meaning of justice in education as being “a question of fairness in distribution… equality.”(Connell, 1993) “Justice cannot be achieved by distributing the same… standard good to… all social classes.”(Connell, 1993) By stating this, Connell summarizes that in the attempt to achieve equality, unequal means must be employed.
Having off campus is a privilege not a right for Junior’s and Senior’s. If sophomores were to be granted this privilege, students would become more motivated to stay off AGG, improve their grades, and not get disciplinary referrals. The staff at SU would also benefit from this. The AGG list would decrease, making the line to get into the cafeteria smaller. Classes would not be as crowded with students during AGG, giving teachers more one on one time with students.