{"id":4377,"date":"2015-06-26T02:56:28","date_gmt":"2015-06-26T02:56:28","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.rationalargumentator.com\/index\/?p=4377"},"modified":"2015-06-26T03:05:39","modified_gmt":"2015-06-26T03:05:39","slug":"blurred-lines","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.rationalargumentator.com\/index\/blog\/2015\/06\/blurred-lines\/","title":{"rendered":"Blurred Lines: The Humanitarian Threat to Free Speech – Article by Aaron Tao"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\"The<\/a>Aaron Tao
\n<\/big><\/big><\/strong><\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\n
June 25, 2015<\/span>
\n<\/big><\/div>\n
******************************<\/div>\n
\n
\n

\u201cThink of liberalism \u2026 as a collection of ideas or principles which go to make up an attitude or \u2018habit of mind.\u2019\u201d <\/em>\u2013 Arthur A. Ekirch<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

In\u00a0Democracy in America<\/em><\/a>, Alexis de Tocqueville was keen to observe<\/a>\u00a0that \u201conce the Americans have taken up an idea, whether it be well or ill founded, nothing is more difficult than to eradicate it from their minds.\u201d<\/p>\n

Reflecting upon my experience as a first-generation immigrant who grew up in the United States, I concur with Tocqueville; this inherent feature of the culture<\/a> and character<\/a> of the American people holds true even today.<\/p>\n

In America, there are no sacred cows, no one is above criticism, and no one has the final say on any issue. It is worth emphasizing that today, the United States stands virtually alone<\/a> in the international community in upholding near-absolute freedom of personal expression, largely thanks to the constitutional protections provided by the First Amendment<\/a>.<\/p>\n

But without certain internalized values and principles<\/a>, the legal bulwark of the First Amendment is nothing more than a parchment barrier<\/a>.<\/p>\n

As clich\u00e9 as it may sound, it is important to recognize that our cherished freedom<\/a> to think, speak, write, and express ourselves should not be taken for granted. Defending the principle of free speech is a perennial conflict that has to be fought in the court of public opinion here and abroad.<\/p>\n

Unfortunately, a number of recent developments have greatly alarmed civil libertarians and may very well carry long-term negative repercussions for the United States as a free and open society.<\/p>\n

In his new book, Freedom from Speech<\/em><\/a>, Greg Lukianoff, the president of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education<\/a> (FIRE) and tireless free speech advocate, highlights<\/a> a troubling cultural phenomenon: the blurring of physical safety with psychological and ideological comfort.<\/p>\n

It is a disturbing trend that is not limited to the United States:<\/p>\n

\n

People all over the globe are coming to expect emotional and intellectual comfort as though it were a right. This is precisely what you would expect when you train a generation to believe that they have a right not to be offended. Eventually, they stop demanding freedom of speech and start demanding freedom from speech.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

On the other side of Atlantic, Great Britain is undergoing what one writer describes as a \u201cslow death of free speech<\/a>.\u201d The land of Milton<\/a> is now home to luminaries<\/a> who wish to reinstate Crown licensing<\/a> of the press (not seen since 1695!).<\/p>\n

Meanwhile, ordinary people face jail time<\/a> for callous tweeting. In British universities, student-driven<\/a> campaigns have successfully shut down debates<\/a> and banned pop songs<\/a>, newspapers<\/a>, and even philosophy clubs<\/a>.<\/p>\n

While the United States is fortunate enough to have the First Amendment prevent<\/a> outright government regulation of the press, cultural attitudes<\/a> play a greater role in maintaining a healthy civil society.<\/p>\n

Lukianoff reserves special criticism for American higher education for \u201cneglecting to teach the intellectual habits that promote debate and discussion, tolerance for views we hate, epistemic humility, and genuine pluralism.\u201d<\/p>\n

Within academia, \u201ctrigger warnings<\/a>\u201d and \u201csafe places<\/a>\u201d are proliferating. In a truly Bizarro twist, it has now come to the point that faculty members are defending individual rights and due process<\/a> and decrying mob rule<\/a>, while their students run off in the opposite direction.<\/p>\n

We now hear on a regular basis of campus outrages<\/a> involving a controversial speaker or perceived injustice, and the \u201coffended\u201d parties responding with a frenzied social media crusade or a real-world attempt to shame, bully, browbeat, censor, or otherwise punish the offender.<\/p>\n

A small sampling from this season include attempts to ban screenings of American Sniper<\/em> at the University of Michigan<\/a> and the University of Maryland<\/a>, resolutions to create a Stasi-like \u201cmicroaggression\u201d reporting system at Ithaca College<\/a>, and the controversy<\/a> involving AEI scholar Christina Hoff Sommers speaking at Oberlin College<\/a>.<\/p>\n

These incidents are just the tip of the iceberg.<\/p>\n

With the endless stream of manufactured outrages, perhaps it is fitting that George Mason University law professor David Bernstein would raise<\/a> the question, \u201cWhere and when did this \u2018makes me feel unsafe\u2019 thing start?\u201d<\/p>\n

My personal hypothesis: When postmodernism<\/a> found itself a new home on Tumblr<\/a>, spread across the left-wing blogosphere<\/a>, became reinforced by mobs<\/a> and echo-chambers<\/a>, and spilled into the real world.<\/p>\n

Luckily, not all<\/a> progressives<\/a> have sacrificed<\/a> the basic principles of liberalism<\/a> to the altar of radical identity politics and political correctness. One liberal student at NYU courageously pointed out<\/a> the grave dangers posed by the ideology embraced by many of his peers:<\/p>\n

\n

This particular brand of millennial social justice advocacy is destructive to academia, intellectual honesty, and true critical thinking and open mindedness. We see it already having a profound impact on the way universities act<\/a> and how they approach curriculum<\/a>. \u2026<\/p>\n

The version of millennial social justice advocacy that I have spoken about \u2014 one that uses Identity Politics to balkanize groups of people, engenders hatred between groups, willingly lies to push agendas, manipulates language to provide immunity from criticism, and that publicly shames<\/a> anyone who remotely speaks some sort of dissent from the overarching narrative of the orthodoxy \u2014 is not admirable.<\/p>\n

It is deplorable. It appeals to the basest of human instincts: fear and hatred. It is not an enlightened or educated position to take. History will not look kindly on this Orwellian, authoritarian perversion of social justice that has taken social media and millennials by storm over the past few years.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

I, too, am convinced that these activists<\/a>, with their MO<\/a>\u00a0of\u00a0hysterical crusades<\/a>, are one of today\u2019s biggest threats to free speech, open inquiry, and genuine tolerance, at least on college campuses<\/a>. The illiberal climate<\/a> fostered by these their ideologues seems to be spreading throughout academia and is continuing to dominate the headlines.<\/p>\n

As of this writing, Northwestern professor (and self-described feminist<\/a>) Laura Kipnis is undergoing<\/a> a Kafkaesque Title IX inquisition<\/a> for writing a column<\/a> in the Chronicle of Higher Education<\/em> and making comments on Twitter that offended a number of students. The aggrieved<\/a> mobilized in full force to have her punished under the federal sex discrimination law.<\/p>\n

These groups and their tactics represent what Jonathan Rauch would describe as the \u201chumanitarian\u201d challenge to free speech. In his must-read book<\/a>, Kindly Inquisitors: The New Attacks on Free Thought<\/em><\/a>, Rauch identified how these \u201chumanitarians\u201d sought to prevent \u201coffense\u201d to \u201coppressed and historically marginalized\u201d peoples. In the name of \u201ccompassion,\u201d words became conflated with physical action.<\/p>\n

As speech codes spread and the definition of \u201charassment\u201d (reading a book in public<\/a>, for instance) became broader within the bureaucracy of academia, an \u201coffendedness sweepstakes\u201d was cultivated and turned into the norm.<\/p>\n

Rauch\u2019s book was published in 1993, but his diagnosis and arguments still apply today, if not more, in the age of social media when the \u201coffendedness sweepstakes\u201d are amplified to new levels.<\/p>\n

Nowadays, PC grievance mongers can organize much more effectively and more often than not, get rewarded for their efforts. The future of a free society looks very bleak should these types become a dominant force on the political landscape. I can\u2019t help but shiver at the prospect of seeing the chronically-offended<\/a> eggshells<\/a> of my generation becoming tomorrow\u2019s legislators and judges<\/a>. The chilling effects are already being felt.<\/p>\n

Even as numerous challenges emerge from all corners, free speech has unparalleled potential for human liberation in the Digital Age. The eternal battle<\/a> is still that of liberty versus power, and the individual versus the collective. I remain confident that truth can still prevail in the marketplace of ideas. It is for this reason we should treasure and defend the principles, practices, and institutions that make it possible.<\/p>\n

Last month marked the birthday of the brilliant F.A. Hayek<\/a>, the gentleman-scholar who made landmark contributions<\/a> to fields of economics<\/a>, philosophy<\/a>, political science<\/a>, and law<\/a>, and established his name as the twentieth century\u2019s most eminent defender of classical liberalism in the face of the collectivist zeitgeist.<\/p>\n

For all his accomplishments, Hayek practiced and urged epistemological humility (a position<\/a> that should be natural to any defender of free speech) in his Nobel lecture<\/a>. Looking back on his life\u2019s work<\/a>, Hayek was highly skeptical of the nebulous concept of \u201csocial justice<\/a>\u201d and its totalitarian implications<\/a>. He even went as far as to devote an entire volume of his magnum opus, Law, Legislation, and Liberty<\/em><\/a>, to completely demolish The Mirage of Social Justice<\/em><\/a>.<\/p>\n

Hayek concluded:<\/p>\n

\n

What we have to deal with in the case of \u201csocial justice\u201d is simply a quasireligious superstition of the kind which we should respectfully leave in peace so long as it merely makes those happy who hold it, but which we must fight when it becomes the pretext of coercing other men<\/strong> [emphasis added].<\/p>\n

And the prevailing belief in \u201csocial justice\u201d is at present probably the gravest threat to most other values of a free civilization.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Hayek did not predict that \u201csocial justice\u201d would be first used to silence dissent before moving on to its long-term agenda, but it would not have surprised him. Weak ideas always grasp for the censor in the face of sustained criticism \u2014 and feeble ideas made strong by politics are the most dangerous of all.<\/p>\n

Humanitarians with guillotines<\/a> can be found from the French Revolution to present day. Modern day defenders of individual liberty would do well to heed Hayek\u2019s warning and resist the Siren song of \u201csocial justice,\u201d the rallying cry of collectivists who cannot realize their vision without coercion.<\/p>\n

Aaron Tao is the Marketing Coordinator and Assistant Editor of The Beacon <\/em>at the Independent Institute.<\/strong><\/p>\n

This article was published by The Foundation for Economic Education<\/a> and may be freely distributed, subject to a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License<\/a>, which requires that credit be given to the author.<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Aaron Tao June 25, 2015 ****************************** \u201cThink of liberalism \u2026 as a collection of ideas or principles which go to make up an attitude or \u2018habit of mind.\u2019\u201d \u2013 Arthur A. Ekirch In\u00a0Democracy in America, Alexis de Tocqueville was keen to observe\u00a0that \u201conce the Americans have taken up an idea, whether it be well or ill founded, nothing is more difficult than to eradicate it from their minds.\u201d Reflecting upon my experience as a first-generation immigrant who grew up in…<\/p>\n

Read More Read More<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1634,177],"tags":[4147,441,953,2431,1297,362,84,1692,4152,4150,30,59,4149,2666,4151,4148,3519,25,1505],"class_list":["post-4377","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-education-2","category-justice","tag-aaron-tao","tag-censorship","tag-college","tag-f-a-hayek","tag-first-amendment","tag-free-speech","tag-freedom","tag-friedrich-hayek","tag-greg-lukianoff","tag-left","tag-libertarian","tag-liberty","tag-offense","tag-social-justice","tag-social-justice-warriors","tag-speech-codes","tag-united-kingdom","tag-united-states","tag-university"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.rationalargumentator.com\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4377","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.rationalargumentator.com\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.rationalargumentator.com\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rationalargumentator.com\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rationalargumentator.com\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4377"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.rationalargumentator.com\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4377\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4379,"href":"https:\/\/www.rationalargumentator.com\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4377\/revisions\/4379"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.rationalargumentator.com\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4377"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rationalargumentator.com\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4377"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rationalargumentator.com\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4377"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}