Madison needs to stop protecting feelings and start protecting freedom of speech

Recently on the campus of UW-Madison, there has been much controversy over a student wishing to form an Alt-Right group. While Daniel Dropik, person interesting in forming the group, has decided not to go through with it, it seems to have touched Madison in a particular way.

Many were concerned over issues involving hate speech, discrimination, and white nationalism surfacing from the formation of a group like this.

While these are perfectly valid things to be worried about when an alt-right group is being formed, I believe stifling the voices of those we disagree with sends an even worse message to not just UW-Madison, but the country as a whole.

At a time when freedom of speech issues are coming to the forefront of every American’s life, I think we should have allowed this group to be formed.

In doing so, we would have not only been upholding the First Amendment, but would have allowed for a continuous dialogue and given those who contended the alt-right the chance to democratically voice their opinions, rather than authoritatively assert them.

Peaceful protestors of the Alt-Right in Washington

A perfect example of this assertion can be see in a quote from a Madison student, Colin Barushok, chair of the Student Services Finance Committee. He said “Calling racism ‘alt-right’ and treating displays of white power as free speech will not ease the anxiety of students of color on this campus.”

There are a couple of things that bother me about this quote, and I think it is important everyone understands why.

The first is that the opposition to his own views was immediately written off. Barushok took no hesitation in calling anyone associated with the group racist white supremacists. Can we take a second to realize exactly what that is implying?

Say, for instance, this group actually did get formed. According to this viewpoint, a freshman attending an initial meeting for this group for the purpose of exploring different political views is now “racist.” Disagree with the views of the alt-right as you may, you cannot deny that throwing harsh blanket statements over things you do not approve of is dangerous. In a free society, no ideas are off-limits.

The second major problem in what he said was him elaborating that the formation of this group would not ease the anxiety of students of color on campus. My question is this: Why? Why are the feelings of those who do not agree with the sentiments the alt-right supports more important than the ideals of freedom? Saying we cannot have this group formed because it “will not ease the anxiety of students of color on this campus” is undemocratic. One’s right to not hear things they do not wish to hear does not supersede one’s right to express themselves.

I would like to take this time to make it perfectly clear that I do not sympathize with the Alt-Right. Would I have fully supported their fight to become a university-recognized group? Yes. Would I ever get involved with them if they succeeded? Hell no.

Richard Spencer at the 2016 Republican National Convention

Whether or not people agree with the Alt-Right is beside the point. The point is that we are completely and totally disregarding free speech in the hopes of making everyone feel safe from thoughts and ideas that differ from their own.

UW-Madison is a premier university, and needs a wide range of ideas to circulate on campus. If we continue to make this campus an echo chamber of one-sided political views in an attempt to not hurt anyone’s feelings, we are absolutely devaluing the ideals of freedom of speech.

We should defeat the alt-right movement through argument not through no-platforming.

I will end with a relevant quote from Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a Somali-born Dutch-American political activist and feminist. “Free speech is the bedrock of liberty and a free society. And yes, it includes the right to blaspheme and offend.”

Would you like to write a response to this piece? Email [email protected]