No one who read what I posted regarding that earlier Summers imbroglio will be surprised when I say that this latest turn of events in the Tom Paulin affair is not good. Michael Sevi reports that the English Department there “sincerely regret [sic] the widespread consternation that has arisen as a result of this invitation.” Now, assuming I understand all the facts correctly, I have this to say: on a college campus, consternation is not only a good thing — it is essential. What good is a speaker who doesn’t challenge views, mention the unmentionable, advocate what is, to you, anathema? The idea that mere “consternation” is enough for an event to be withdrawn is shocking and appalling. It’s called a heckler’s veto, folks. And it does not bode well for free and robust expression at Harvard.
Besides: if what he’s reported to have said is true, then the refutation of his viewpoints is easy as pie. Why not resort to that, rather than the heavy (and dead) hand of censorship?
I assume I’m speaking to the choir here, mostly.
Be the first to comment on "Shame, Shame"