Further to yesterday's coverage of the shameful behavior at the University of Ottawa Tuesday night which led to the cancellation of Ann Coulter's speech, we have yet another embarrassment to deal with.
On the Fox News Channel today, NOW Toronto columnist Susan G. Cole was interviewed, essentially saying that Coulter got what she deserved.
Now, Ms. Cole is certainly entitled to her views, but what you'll notice in the interview is how frequently she speaks on behalf of the entire country - how "we" view things here in Canada:
Susan G. Cole, you don't speak for me, and you don't speak for millions of Canadians. In fact, you do this great country a disservice by misrepresenting our strong and proud tradition of protecting freedom of expression.
Hopefully Ms. Cole is in the minority. Because it's not just right-wing Canadians concerned about free speech in the aftermath of this fiasco at the U of O - it's many Canadians who otherwise are diametrically opposed to Ann Coulter's views.
For example, the University of Ottawa itself:
The University of Ottawa has always promoted and defended freedom of expression. For that reason, we did not at any time oppose Ann Coulter’s appearance. Whether it is Ann Coulter or any other speaker, diverse views have always been and continue to be welcome on our campus.
(...)
“Freedom of expression is a core value that the University of Ottawa has always promoted,” said Allan Rock, President of the University. “We have a long history of hosting contentious and controversial speakers on our campus. Last night was no exception, as people gathered here to listen to and debate Ann Coulter’s opinions.
The University of Ottawa's student newspaper The Fulcrum:
Students, members of the Student Federation of the University of Ottawa (SFUO) executive, and at least one U of O vice-president were inspired to take action against Coulter’s presence on campus because of her reputation for disseminating extremely controversial and outrageously conservative opinions. They insinuated Coulter would promote hate speech on campus and decided it would be in all students’ best interests to stifle her provocative rhetoric.
Thanks for looking out for us.
In doing so, they managed to insult about 35,000 students. That’s not an easy task. Are we so susceptible to contentious prose that we are incapable of determining the validity of an argument for ourselves? Now, instead of allowing U of O students the opportunity to weigh the strength of her arguments, or at least the opportunity to listen to the outrageousness of her claims, they have deprived students of an excellent opportunity for debate and learning.
We can think for ourselves, thank you.
Left-of-centre federal politicians:
Members of all political stripes Wednesday denounced security threats at the University of Ottawa that forced organizers to cancel a speech by the American conservative pundit.
“I feel really bad for people that ... she has insulted, whether it is telling people to go ride a camel, etc. It is just uncalled for, but that is her right to say so,” said NDP MP Olivia Chow. “Fundamentally, I believe in freedom of speech. She should have a chance to speak.”
Liberal MP Keith Martin agreed Coulter has the right to speak, regardless of her views.
“Whatever I think of Ms. Coulter, she has a fundamental right to be able to speak in Canada. People have a right to protest; she also has a right to speak,” he said.
Vancouver Sun columnist Shelley Fralic:
Yes, Ann Coulter is odious. Yes, she's a scare-monger, an articulate hothead whose fame and fortune is directly linked to her acerbic assessment of all that she deems to represent the downfall of modern civilization.
But to invite her to speak and then send her an official and not-so-subtle threatening letter suggesting she watch her mouth? To protest her appearance to the point that she's sent home in fear for her safety?
Get serious.
We either have freedom of speech, or we don't. And clearly, in some halls of higher learning, we don't.
Further thoughts on free speech on campus from the BCCLA (PDF):
"It should not be necessary for us to fight for freedom of conscience, opinion, and expression on a university campus. YPY?s point of view may be unpopular and shared by only a minority of university students, but that is precisely why both democratic and academic freedoms need to be protected."
Some of the central tenets of a university education are critical thinking, intense debate and the adventurous search for truth. Faculty and students must be free to ask challenging questions and to express provocative and even at times offensive opinions without fear of official sanction or censorship. If university campuses become places where highly controversial subjects cannot be vigorously debated and challenged through words, images and non-violent actions, then where in society can we expect freedom of expression to prevail?
And yes, I know Ms. Cole doesn't like those Americans and their "religion" of free speech, but it's worth noting what many liberal Americans are saying:
She is a vile lunatic, but she should have been given the right to speak, and then her noise should have been ripped apart with good questions, and conversation after the event. It's pretty much guaranteed that she would have said things that are stupid and outrageous and embarrassed herself — not that she'd notice, since she's shameless — but now she gets a free pass and a martyr card.
ScienceBlogs' Eric Michael Johnson:
Any effort to criminalize speech is effectively criminalizing dissent. At one time it was illegal to speak publicly about birth control (Emma Goldman was arrested more than a dozen times for giving speeches on the topic), women were arrested for picketing the White House demanding white women's suffrage, and police officers have beaten African-American and white protesters for riding buses together across state lines. Criminalizing free speech most often works to the detriment of marginalized groups and is in the benefit of the powerful. During the Olympics it was illegal for Canadians to express their disagreement with their government by holding signs denigrating the Olympic symbol, even if those signs were inside their home. Once the state gets involved in legislating opinions we are in slippery slope territory.
Coulter is a shock jock and a mere flash in the pan of our public discourse. She will be forgotten about and the world will be better for it. But we should be careful about the desire to criminalize views that we disagree with, because those remain long after the person they were meant to protect us from.
Salon's Glenn Greenwald:
The far-right hatemonger Ann Coulter was invited by a campus conservative group to speak at the University of Ottawa, and the Vice Provost of that college sent Coulter a letter warning her that she may be subject to criminal prosecution if the views she expresses fall into the realm of prohibited viewpoints(...)For as long as I'll live, I'll never understand how people want to vest in the Government the power to criminalize particular viewpoints it dislikes, will never understand the view that it's better to try to suppress adverse beliefs than to air them, and will especially never understand people's failure to realize that endorsing this power will, one day, very likely result in their own views being criminalized when their political enemies (rather than allies) are empowered
Esquire's Mark Warren:
Way to go, Canada! You've achieved the nearly-impossible, and made Ann Coulter a nearly sympathetic figure. And you've got me defending the tiresome freak. First, some functionary from one of your universities actually threatened that if she wasn't nice when she showed up in your country for her scheduled speaking engagements this week, that she could be prosecuted for her ideas, and then when your idiot mob gathered at the University of Ottawa last night and threatened violence (I must say, Canadian and violence are two words that you normally don't think of together), the local constabulary succumbed to mob justice and shut 'er down. Free speech sucks, huh, Canada?
UPDATE: The Ottawa Citizen's Dan Gardner sums up Susan G. Cole in a single, splendid sentence:
If there's anything more depressing than a journalist arguing in favour of the suppression of free speech, it's a Canadian journalist doing so on American television and claiming, in effect, to speak for all Canadians.
No comments:
Post a Comment