OPINION & EDITORIAL
Well done, Columbia
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:
- A security fee-for-all (December 11, 2007)
- Farewell, Chancellor (December 10, 2007)
- $$FC (December 6, 2007)
- In a bind (December 5, 2007)
- Entitlement Town (December 4, 2007)
Related Stories:
- U.S. must expose emerging cold war (January 25, 2007)
- Misguided denial of Dubai deal bad sign for globalization (March 22, 2006)
- Reflections on a tragedy: Where are we after 9/11? (September 11, 2003)
- Progressive talk radio deserves better (September 9, 2005)
- Neo-cons, neo-problems (March 13, 2003)
by Badger Herald Editorial Board
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
Not since the Cold War has the importance of ideas and ideologues been more apparent within the international community than it is now. Whether the United States is in the midst of a "Clash of Civilizations" between East and West, as some academics claim, or we are simply in the early and consequential stages of globalization, the free flow of political rhetoric has become increasingly vital to understanding and advancing our foreign relations.
It is for this reason, among others, that we applaud Columbia University's decision to allow Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad — who has denied the Holocaust, sponsored terrorism in the Middle East and called for the destruction of Israel — the opportunity to speak on its campus Monday.
As students and current members of the academic community, we understand that it is our principal duty to seek a continuing education based on the search for truth through the free flow of ideas. If anything, the university is and should remain an arena for uninhibited free speech — regardless of the amount of dissent that speech may rightfully engender.
Indeed, our own University of Wisconsin System is no stranger to the controversy that invariably surrounds academic freedom.
In 2005, UW-Whitewater allowed University of Colorado professor Ward Churchill to speak at its university despite the fact the professor had written an essay wherein he likened the victims of the Sept. 11 attacks to Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann and proclaimed the attacks were proper vindication for U.S. foreign policy. Despite his radical assertions, the university held firm to the guiding principles of free speech and allowed him to speak.
This editorial board strongly supported UW-Whitewater's decision, quoting Justice John Paul Stevens from a 1984 U.S. Supreme Court decision: "The First Amendment presupposes that the freedom to speak one's mind is not only an aspect of individual liberty — and thus a good unto itself — but also is essential to the common quest for truth and the vitality of society as a whole."
These verities remain as true today as they ever have been. They applied to Mr. Churchill, they applied last year to Sept. 11 conspiracy theorist and UW-Madison lecturer Kevin Barrett and they apply to the decidedly fanatical president of Iran, Mr. Ahmadinejad.
In addressing Mr. Ahmadinejad and the hoards of criticism for allowing the Iranian president to engage at his university, Columbia President Lee Bollinger said: "In the moment, the arguments for free speech will never seem to match the power of the arguments against, but what we must remember is that this is precisely because free speech asks us to exercise extraordinary self-restraint against the very natural but often counterproductive impulses that lead us to retreat from engagement with ideas we dislike and fear."
Such is the essence of the frightening, yet revolutionary, concept of the First Amendment, and we are wholly encouraged that our fellow institute of higher education has followed such compelling principles.
Most importantly, however, is that while the educational benefits of hearing Mr. Ahmadinejad speak are evident, our commendation of Columbia's decision comes not so much from the university's willingness to give Mr. Ahmadinejad a platform from which to address the American people, as much as its commitment to truly confront his radical dogma.
In his opening address, precluding Mr. Ahmadinejad's speech and ensuing question and answer session, Mr. Bollinger challenged Mr. Ahmadinejad to directly respond to the issues of Iran's human rights violations against women, homosexuals, members of the Baha'i faith, journalists and scholars. He demanded an explanation for the denial of the Holocaust, the claims to destroy Israel and the state-sponsored support of Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, Hamas, the Taliban and insurgent leaders in Iraq. Mr. Bollinger also called for an answer to the continued violations of the International Atomic Energy Agency, doubted the Iranian president had the "intellectual courage" to answer his questions and addressed him as a "cruel and petty dictator."
While the principles of the First Amendment call for us to allow ideas and ideologues truly uninhibited expression — be it Mr. Ahmadinejad, communism or neo-Nazism — truth and justice, especially in the university, call for us to retort whenever appropriate. We applaud Mr. Bollinger's motives and candid criticism of a truly cruel and petty dictator.
It is hard to imagine a greater example of the American ideal of free speech than allowing one of America's greatest enemies the opportunity to engage in a sincerely democratic forum at one of the finest American universities. We can only imagine the international progress that would ensue if the true opportunity to exercise free speech were permitted — within the general and academic discourse — in the very country from which Mr. Ahmadinejad hails.
Anonymous (September 26, 2007 @ 3:50am):
Don't underestimate the power free speech possesses to make evil look like what it is: evil.
It shows great strength that an American forum gave President Ahmadinejad a place to speak and fairly and rigorously ripped him a new arsehole. The pwning he received the other day reminds me once again of why I love our country so much.
It is too bad Hitler didn't come and speak here during the 1930s in a similar type of forum. After all, we very possibly could have gone to war sooner as a result, for American Isolationists, Nazi Apologists, and Pacifists would have seen Hitler more for what he was: a despicable and power hungry human being.
This week's events will not be the last time free speech assists a wicked person in revealing their own immorality.
-David Lapidus
Zyskandar Jaimot (September 26, 2007 @ 8:31am):
When is the next 'GAY PRIDE DAY' or 'WOMEN'S DAY PARADE' in TEHERAN???
O.K. WHACKADOOS AT THE BADGER -- STOP DOING THE 'WHACKY WEED' AND FACE REALITY!!! According to MAHMOUD ACHMADINAJEAD "...there is no problem with 'homosexuals in IRAN - there aren't any," told too laughing COLUMBIA COMMUNITY ^SSHOLES of that institution.[If MAHMOUD had stated they didn't have 'problems' with Jews cuz IRAN has driven out or killed most of them would the '^ssholes' of the COLUMBIA COMMUNITY be laughing at that too???] According to ACHMADINAJEAD - IRAN has the 'free-est' women on the planet - violate S'HARIA LAW and get 'stoned' as in put to death - not getting high!!! SOME GREAT SOCIETY IRAN HUH???
Anonymous (September 26, 2007 @ 8:42am):
Cluebat: The First Amendment applies to Americans-- not foreign terrorists.
Ahmadinejad should have been arrested and indicted, not applauded by wacademia.
Anonymous (September 26, 2007 @ 9:01am):
Four years ago, a Montreal photo-journalist, Zahra Kazemi, was arrested in Tehran, taken to Evin prison, and wound up getting interviewed to death. The following year, Shahram Azam (a physician who'd examined Kazemi's body) fled Iran and said that she had broken fingers, a broken nose, a crushed toe, a skull fracture, severe abdominal bruising, and internal damage consistent with various forms of rape. Quite an interview.
It'd be nice to think academia ignored this situation out of concerns for Ahmadinejad's free speech rights. But I'll bet Ahmadinejad wouldn't really care if everyone put Zahra Kazemi on the front pages 24/7.
Ahmadinejad figures that's how it usually goes with a plump, complacent Western world that just wishes these crazies would stop trying to catch its eye. In recent weeks, Iran stoned to death various citizens for adultery and homosexuality-- which pretty much ended their free speech.
But why let a few stonings throw academia's free speech initiative off track? And, if buddying journalists in wacademia are so eager to give you a podium, why not remind them of the rules of the game? This summer, the Iranians paraded U.S. hostage journalists all over TV as they confessed to engaging in espionage, along the way fingering the Woodrow Wilson Center and George Soros as key elements in the plot to overthrow the ayatollahs.
So enjoy the self-congratulation and the journalistic majesterial objectivity. Just don't imagine you engaged in any real discourse.
Anonymous (September 26, 2007 @ 9:26am):
You are on the right track with the free speech direction -- Badger Herald path dependency at its finest. Yet, Mr. Bollinger did not make the arena the free speech occurred in one that most would commend. Insulting the invited guest before he gave his remarks was a poor way to display one of the United States' finest qualities to the world. Even Mr. Ahmadinejad noted that he would at least allow his guests to speak before he insulted them. Next time you trumpet the wonders of free speech, make sure you also criticize the failures to correct things in the future. Sifting and Winnowing baby, sifting and winnowing.
Anonymous (September 26, 2007 @ 9:27am):
I'm glad to see the Badger Herald renewing its long-standing support of free speech - and, indeed, academic freedom. It is refreshing to see a sensible defense of Columbia, and the Editorial Board could scarcely have molded its argument in more firmly rooted language.
-Maggie Beth Vernon
Anonymous (September 26, 2007 @ 9:59am):
hate speech is NOT free speech
Anonymous (September 26, 2007 @ 11:13am):
"hate speech is NOT free speech"
I guess this is the new "PC 90's" that the trolls started whining about 3 weeks ago.
And I applaud Bollinger for the classy introduction. I'm sure Columbia students have a lot of nasty things they could introduce him with (i.e. the labor record at Columbia) next time he speaks in public.
Anonymous (September 26, 2007 @ 11:26am):
David drooled @ 3:50am: "It is too bad Hitler didn't come and speak here during the 1930s in a similar type of forum."
Apparently, the American Bund rally in Madison Square Garden wasn't enough to stop fascism in it's tracks?
Yes, let's give fascists our microphones. It couldn't possibly embolden them.
Anonymous (September 26, 2007 @ 11:48am):
The Columbia Spectator editorial board is all but admitting today that the speech was nothing but a hostage pay-off.
http://www.columbiaspectator.com/?q=node/26968
"On the same day the invitation to Ahmadinejad was announced, Kian Tajbakhsh, who received his Ph.D. at Columbia, was freed from the Iranian prison that he had been held in since May..."
Yes, Columbia, you see that would be what law schools call "quid pro quo"-- and criminal justice schools call "extortion pay-offs."
Anonymous (September 26, 2007 @ 12:18pm):
Sadly, the articles published in today's Badger Herald on this issue demonstrate now naíve UW students really are-especially when it comes to their world view. The "principles of free speech" guaranteed by the First Amendment are for American citizens-not foreign terrorists. Since Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is not an American citizen, he does not have the right to come to our country and contribute to the "free flow of ideas." This is not a question of academic freedom or free speech. It's a matter of the extreme lunatic-fringe leftists embarrassing themselves by trying to embrace a radical free speech ideology that does nothing but make Columbian University the sad laughing stock of the academic community. Who would have thought that they could pull something off even more ridiculous than the debacle last year involving the border patrol agents?
Anonymous (September 26, 2007 @ 1:11pm):
"In 2005, UW-Whitewater allowed University of Colorado professor Ward Churchill to speak at its university despite the fact the professor had written an essay wherein he likened the victims of the Sept. 11 attacks to Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann and proclaimed the attacks were proper vindication for U.S. foreign policy."
Let's compare the Board's thoughts on Chruchill with what Churchill actually believes. He has said:
"I am not a "defender" of the September 11 attacks..."
"I have never said that people "should" engage in armed attacks on the United States, but that such attacks are a natural and unavoidable consequence of unlawful U.S. policy."
"If you want to avoid September 11s, if you want security in some actual form, then it's almost a biblical framing, you have to do unto others as you would have them do unto you."
Anonymous (September 26, 2007 @ 2:00pm):
To those attacking academic freedom and free speech:
If you disagree with that individual, shouldn't you encourage more dialogue? If you believe someone to be factually incorrect, aren't you obligated to produce evidence to the contrary? If you believe someone intends you harm, shouldn't you show them your humanity?
The old phrase goes, "keep your friends close and your enemies closer." While connections between Iran and the US aren't enough to solve this situation on their own, I certainly don't see how this cannot help the problem. On the other hand, alienating dissidents only creates more problems.
Anonymous (September 26, 2007 @ 3:13pm):
The Iranian President was hardly invited by fringe leftists, but rather by a University program that invites foreign heads of state to speak. Why should others be selected and him snubbed? The quality of education at Columbia would definitely deteriorate if they only chose to invite current US allies.
Anonymous (September 26, 2007 @ 3:19pm):
2:00pm drooled: "If you believe someone intends you harm, shouldn't you show them your humanity?"
Kinda' like smiling at the crocs to see if they'll grin back?
What sort of humanity did Canadian photo-journalist Zahra Kazemi fail to show to avoid being brutally tortured, raped and murdered by Ahmadenijad's thugs?
Leftist naivete' would be amusing, if it weren't so suicidal.
Anonymous (September 26, 2007 @ 9:39pm):
I doubt freedom of speech had much to do with this invitation. rather, this could have been columbia's attempt to bring iran's recent history of oppression to the forefront of american discussion? hey... it seems to have worked. what media outlet hasn't over covered this story to death and incessantly talked about iran's hatred of israel, treatment of women and homosexuals, and links to terrorism? finally, we get intelligent conversation on iran and americans open their eyes to the evil that is president ahmadinejad
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.
