OPINION & EDITORIAL
UW liberals often censor conservatives
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Robert Phansalkar:
- 'Think, Respect' does neither, preempts rational action (November 14, 2007)
- 'Taser this' editorial tame compared to past (October 2, 2007)
- Lawmakers' plan bigger problem than baggy pants (September 18, 2007)
- Right-wing judicial activism fault of liberal tactics (August 31, 2007)
Related Stories:
- Readers drop gloves, bust some skulls (September 7, 2007)
- Conservatism growing on college campuses (September 24, 2003)
- College experience defines viewpoints (December 7, 2007)
- Professors not responsible for liberal leanings (February 6, 2002)
- LTE: Vindication for conservatives (November 5, 2004)
by Robert Phansalkar
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
It finally happened. In the process of arguing a moderate political position, a friend of mine less than affectionately dubbed me "Republican Rob" simply because I had not taken the blue pill for Liberal Politics 101.
Now I am not one for partisan politics, as it has a tendency to corrupt the mind and weaken otherwise strong arguments. My friend certainly was aware of this, which made her comments all the more confusing. Since I don't recognize myself as a Republican, much less anything else, I had to try and understand why arguing moderate political points suddenly made me Bush's right-hand man.
Name-calling similar to what my friend did would seem to be the resort of an uninformed and immature dissenter, but in this case, it was much more than that. She knew my point and understood why I was making it, but rather than attack it on its grounds and merits, she criticized me because I "used to be cool," and by that she of course meant "liberal."
Apologies to my friend, but this kind of reaction is indicative of a greater problem on campus, which stifles actual discussion and creates a false consensus on issues where actual debate is necessary. This silent censorship that results from attitudes much like my friend's has been around for years. But the last place you would want or hope to find it is on a university campus, least of all, one that professes itself to be open-minded, tolerant and diverse.
However, it is readily apparent that at the University of Wisconsin, the only thing students are open to is liberal ideas; the only thing they are tolerant of is dissent on just how liberal policies should be, and the meaning of the word diversity is superficially limited to skin color and culture.
The right will often charge that this mentality is the result of universities rife with liberal professors and administrators who indoctrinate their students into Democratic Party peons. But, in this case, the professors and administrators are hardly the source of the problem. It is actually the students: students who argue so loudly that their opponents' points cannot be heard, who create an environment where conservative ideas are not even discussed and who won't even tolerate the ideas of their conservative counterparts when voiced.
What is lost in this is a genuine chance to change people's minds. If liberals so firmly believe their stance is correct, they should encourage genuine debate and listen to the ideas of their counterparts who have the ability to make strong, genuine contributions to discussions.
If you are already right, then you will have nothing to lose by listening, and if you gain nothing else from your conservative opponents, you will have at your disposal the ability to find new ways of approaching people whose minds you are so desirous to change.
However, as a prerequisite for discussion, you must be open to and listen to your opponent's ideas because without this you are certain to get one thing from your conservative adversaries: nothing.
Liberals tend to reject conservative ideas, because, and I am not the exception on this, most of us come from places that are considerably more conservative than Madison.
However, even if you do hail from Waukesha County, chances are someone has an idea or a political position that you have not heard and you could benefit from hearing. To see liberals silently censor ideas is certainly discouraging, especially given the lengthy history of conservative censorship of liberals.
While what liberals do on campus is not illegal according to the First Amendment, it is hardly within the spirit of the law, which has protected liberals and their ideas for so many years. Hypocrisy is certainly not a liberal or conservative value, and we should avoid making it one now.
Consequently, liberals on campus should face a choice: Either embody the mistakes of the past and censor your opponents or take the high road and avoid becoming what you apparently fear the most.
The best path to take: Just listen.
Robert Phansalkar (rphansalkar@badgerherald.com) is a senior majoring in languages and cultures of Asia and political science.
Anonymous (February 13, 2007 @ 7:43am):
Republican Rob, you just have to surround yourself with like-thinkers. For example, you should try voicing your opinions at a gun show, klan rally, or Walmart.
Anonymous (February 13, 2007 @ 7:45am):
Great article. While Madison is a liberal campus, it is not open-minded.
Anonymous (February 13, 2007 @ 8:53am):
Maybe, just maybe she was just teasing you and you don't know how to take a joke.
Anonymous (February 13, 2007 @ 9:06am):
"you just have to surround yourself with like-thinkers."
Like the Liberals do? Only they do it with Commies and Islamofacists and FemiNazis.
Anonymous (February 13, 2007 @ 9:24am):
"UW liberals often censor conservatives"
Well, censor 'em right back! Don't stand there like a wuss and take it! Be a man, man!
Anonymous (February 13, 2007 @ 9:37am):
"liberals often censor conservatives"
Now there's a real "dog bites man" story.
Anonymous (February 13, 2007 @ 10:15am):
Booo!!!
Anonymous (February 13, 2007 @ 10:19am):
My favorite part is how you lecture campus liberals for being intolerant and condescending, while squeezing out this gem: "Now I am not one for partisan politics, as it has a tendency to corrupt the mind and weaken otherwise strong arguments."
Anonymous (February 13, 2007 @ 10:24am):
Hey Bob, why don't you transfer to another school where conservatives rule and see just what kind of censorship THEY are into. Speak out in support of gay marriage and you are immediately branded a "faggot". speak out against the war in Iraq-and the impending war with Iran-and you're branded a "commie pinko" or a "traitor".
Yes, liberals certainly do take things too far, but so do conservatives! It's just a question of which side of the tracks you want to live on.
Anonymous (February 13, 2007 @ 11:11am):
What i don't understand is where do all these hippies come from? 69 of wisconsin's counties are at least moderate, so must be all the students come from milwaukee, madison, and the fox valley. Just because they are louder doesen't mean they know any better than the rest of us.
Anonymous (February 13, 2007 @ 11:24am):
re: 10:24 a.m.
I think the point of the column was to say that EITHER side is bad. It just happens that we, readers of the BH, go to UW and this is the particular climate. He implies that either side is dangerous for any real notion of stimulating political thought.
Also why are people missing the point and saying this kid is a republican? He says about six times that it's not about party politics - it's about thinking about things critically instead of being blind, brain-washed followers of ANY political ideology.
Anonymous (February 13, 2007 @ 11:32am):
Does this REALLY need to be written about every semester? You people did realize you were applying to UW-Madison when you were seniors in high school right??
Anonymous (February 13, 2007 @ 12:30pm):
"Speak out in support of gay marriage and you are immediately branded a "faggot"."
Or attend a Moslem school in an Islamic country and have a wall pushed over on top of you (until you die).
Anonymous (February 13, 2007 @ 12:33pm):
"speak out against the war in Iraq-and the impending war with Iran-and you're branded a "commie pinko" or a "traitor"."
commie pinko?????
Not so much, just a traitor. But then maybe you WANT to put all the women in burkas?
Anonymous (February 13, 2007 @ 12:42pm):
Rob, great article! I too have experienced the "oh, you're a Republican" mentality when discussing certain political issues. Finally someone has spoken out for fostering a free exchange of ideas.
Hyper-liberalized Madisonians prove they are NOT open-minded, progressive, and diversity conscious when they are intolerant of hearing both sides of an issue.
Anonymous (February 13, 2007 @ 1:30pm):
SHOW YOUR TOLERANCE!
vote obama in 08.
lol.
Anonymous (February 13, 2007 @ 1:32pm):
So, you want "open minded people" to be open minded about being close minded? I guess I'm up for that; I'll try anything once. Sex is dirty... oof, I don't like this close-minded way of thinking already.
Anonymous (February 13, 2007 @ 2:07pm):
to 'censor' means to prevent publication or speech. She may have inappropriately labeled you or passed judgment on you but she didn't censor you. Your use of the word (and the misleading headline) undercuts your whole argument.
Anonymous (February 13, 2007 @ 2:42pm):
Vote obama.
show how tolerant you are!
who cares if you don't know anything about him!
Anonymous (February 13, 2007 @ 4:39pm):
"'speak out against the war in Iraq-and the impending war with Iran-and you're branded a "commie pinko" or a "traitor".'
commie pinko?????
Not so much, just a traitor. But then maybe you WANT to put all the women in burkas?"
You just proved their point. Nice.
Anonymous (February 13, 2007 @ 6:15pm):
12:33, can you list all the muslim countries where burkas are required? I'm pretty sure that Iran and Iraq are not on that list. Your best friend Saudi Arabia is probably on that list, but they're cool since Bush and King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz al-Saud have occasional oil wrestling/ tongue wrestling competitions.
Anonymous (February 13, 2007 @ 7:40pm):
Is it really censorship to actively discourage the speech of conservatives? This claim is made so often, and the weak liberal response is always the same: "We don't limit free speech" or "They're exaggerating." Well, I personally believe that actively limiting conservative thought is really a good thing. I mean, is hearing how homosexuality is immoral really an intellectually valid position? Is pointing out that this opinion is not welcome at a progressive university going to "stifle the mind" as Rob and his ilk constantly lead us to believe?
The free speech argument is weak, since EVERYBODY believes that it should have its limits, ie there would be no argument about Nazis having a place at the university. Since this is the case, the backward beliefs of conservatives - including religious fundamentalism, jingoism, racism, etc. - should be actively suppressed by all politically conscious UW students.
Anonymous (February 13, 2007 @ 7:41pm):
Hey editor, the article is about wanting to have your issues accepted rather than labeled conservative or liberal. What do you do? "UW Liberals" are the ones who assail "conservative." Nice polarization.
Anonymous (February 13, 2007 @ 9:37pm):
any argument i've tried to have with republicans (and i have had quite a few) has been grounded either on God, on the notion that poor people are poor because of their own fault or that women belong in the kitchen etc. which is usually God's intention anyways. So, that pretty makes any form of constructive discussion as dead as Jesus Christ himself.
Anonymous (February 13, 2007 @ 9:42pm):
7:40pm, Madison's extreme political separation from the rest of the state needs to be reduced, not encouraged. As the flagship university, we have a responsibility to represent the state. And yes, the immorality of homosexuality is an intellectually/politically valid position, especially considering the overwhelming results on the vote to ban gay marriage in WI last November (which, with Dane being the only county opposing the ban, supports my first point as well).
Anonymous (February 13, 2007 @ 10:01pm):
For everyone who has issues with the title:
The columnist/staff writer does not create the title. The editors make them up for formatting purposes.
Please remember that next time you yell at someone based on the column's title.
Anonymous (February 13, 2007 @ 10:37pm):
I'm having difficulty grasping just how students might censor other students; I was under the impression that censorship is an institutionalized activity. Expressing vehement disapproval and making the progressive voice louder than regressive ones is not censorship, it's the mark of a healthy society.
Anonymous (February 13, 2007 @ 10:42pm):
"Madison's extreme political separation from the rest of the state needs to be reduced, not encouraged."
It's been called the Berkley of the Midwest for generations and will probably remain so.
If you're not a liberal when you're young you may have no heart but if you're still a liberal when you grow older (and wiser?) then you may have no brain.
Anonymous (February 13, 2007 @ 11:37pm):
"If you're not a liberal when you're young you may have no heart but if you're still a liberal when you grow older (and wiser?) then you may have no brain."
Appeal to quotation is not a legitimate form of argument.
Anonymous (February 13, 2007 @ 11:48pm):
editors write headlines....maybe they should get criticized for not taking time for thoughtful headlines
Anonymous (February 14, 2007 @ 3:49pm):
it's not the headline writers fault, the columnist used 'censorship' to describe what was happening to him. He doesn't get a free pass
Add a comment
We welcome your thoughts, but please keep your feedback thoughtful, on-topic and respectful. Offensive language, personal attacks, or irrelevant comments may be deleted.
Login...
Not registered? Sign up now.
It's quick, free, and the email address you provide will not be sold or solicited.
