OPINION & EDITORIAL
UW scores with reparations debate
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Badger Herald Editorial Board:
- Politicking destroyed opt-out's proponents (April 14, 2003)
- Madison's annual hip-hop conference falters (April 14, 2003)
- Dear Dave: Post this near your desk (April 17, 2003)
- Redirecting control (April 23, 2003)
- Don't Cut Historical Society Funds (April 29, 2003)
Related Stories:
- Horowitz visit presents a good opportunity (September 6, 2001)
- The debate that never was (December 3, 2001)
- Let's show Horowitz we value free speech (December 10, 2001)
- Horowitz visit proves UW's free-speech maturity (December 11, 2001)
- Horowitz shows his anti-First Amendment colors (October 23, 2001)
by Badger Herald Editorial Board
Thursday, September 6, 2001
When tensions mounted last spring after the publication of David Horowitz?s anti-reparations ad, only the cooler heads on campus called for a debate that was Socratic, not Springer-esque.
Now, months later, the stage is set for cooler heads to prevail.
Congratulations to the Distinguished Lecture Series for booking Horowitz and reparations advocate Randall Robinson for sequential lectures in late November and early December.
Finally, students will be able to hear Horowitz defend and explain his views personally, as the brief statements published in his ad were the subject of gross over-interpretation last semester. Further, Robinson?s visit should appease students who felt that their views were pushed out of the limelight by the excess attention paid to the free-speech advocates.
While the lectures certainly will not put an end to the reparations controversy on campus, they should mark the symbolic end of pointless bickering, and the beginning of meaningful, open debate about the issue, a welcome change.
Still, there will be those that vehemently oppose Horowitz?s Nov. 20 visit. What such people fail to realize is that having Horowitz on campus has the potential to be a wholly positive experience. When Horowitz speaks, the right and the wrong of his ideas will be evident, and people will be able to judge how they feel about his ideas for themselves. This is the unquestionable importance of freedom of speech ? that expression of and exposure to ideas, no matter how inflammatory, is not dangerous. On the contrary, exposure to multiple points of view, no matter how unpopular, is essential for real campus diversity to exist.
We feel that this point was lost in the heat of the controversy last semester.
