Photo Credit: Conor Friedersdorf,

The Atlantic

Dont Silence our Voices:

An Open Letter to University
Leaders across America

Free speech is under attack at Americas most prestigious institutions of

higher education and its up to university leadership to protect it.
DANIEL HIZGILOV
I
APRIL 2, 2016
In 1969, Presidential hopeful Richard Nixon coined the term Silent Majority in
reference to Americas moderate populace, which chose not to actively participate in
unrest and protest of the Vietnam War. That Silent Majority would catapult Nixon
into the White House (a post he would dishonorably resign from in 1974) and has since

become a crucial element of American politics. I argue that the vast majority of
Americas college students and professors comprise a new Silent Majority: the Muted
Majority.
We live in a time when the very liberties that have been engrained in collegiate
study and life since the Free Speech movements of the 1960s, have come under attack.
The rights your generation fought so vehemently for are being threatened by your
Millennial heirs. They are drawing fire from the voices of a vociferous but greatly
overstated minority that demands action where action would be an overreach of
institutional authority, constraining a constitutionally protected principle that is
necessary for the continuation of deliberation in our democratic society: our freedom
of speech. Ironically, it is under threat from those who seek to snuff out hatred and
bigotry in an ideological crusade that may cost us our right to constructive debate and
discussion.
In October 2015, students at the University of Missouri flipped the script on
traditional student protest. Threats made to the black community by anonymous
persons online and the inaction of school President Timothy Wolfe, prompted students
to call for the Presidents resignation, citing his inability to apprehend and punish the
bigots who had threatened their emotional security (Milligan). The attitude of outrage
towards bigotry and hatred spread like wildfire across a multitude of American college
campuses, including Yale and Princeton. At Yale, students were outraged at the fact
that a psychology professor, Erika Christakis, had sent out an email to refute an idea
the students had about self-censoring their Halloween costumes. That email set the

prestigious university ablaze. Once a hub of individual freedoms and a producer of

great American political thinkers, the school was now engulfed in protests and
confrontations between students and professors as the students demanded a more
inclusive learning environment (Berenson). At Princeton, the protests took the form
of petitions demanding the removal of U.S. President Woodrow Wilsons name from
campus programs and buildings. Wilson, as the president of the school in the early 20th
century, implemented the academic reforms that helped catapult Princeton to its elite
standing in the academic world. As U.S. President, he orchestrated an ill-fated peace
between the world powers after the Great War, but his legacy has been tainted by a
racist past. Wilson oversaw a vast expansion of segregationist policy in federal offices
as black employees were laid off and replaced by white bureaucrats, kicked a civil rights
activist and supporter of his out of the Oval Office, and helped to reject the Racial
Equality Proposal set down by the Japanese government at the treaty of Versailles.
Some of his racism was politically motivated as he was dependent on the Southern
white vote, but Wilson was unusually racist at a personal level even for his
contemporaries in Washington (Lehr). This racist history has caused unease among
African American students at the university who feel that his legacy on campus is a
negative one (Brait).
Student uproar from the vocal minority over bigoted speech has put university
administrators such as yourselves in the precarious position of being forced to find a
comprehensive solution to their concerns. Three potential solutions present
themselves: the implementation of institutional limitations on free speech and

creation of safe spaces where bigoted speech is policed, the use of university resources
to strongly discourage hate speech while censoring class materials, or the application
of education as a tool for teaching students how to refute counter speech that seems
bigoted and irrational by exposing them to bigotry in a controlled classroom
environment.
The first approach to addressing the concerns of the vocal minority, stems
directly from their own requests for institutional policing of speech. Advocates for the
implementation of safe spaces want schools to designate physical areas such as
dormitories and cafeterias as zones free of hateful speech and then enforce that
designation through use of an Orwellian speech police, which would monitor students
interactions and dole out punishment for offensive dialogue. They believe that these
measures will ensure that students are comfortable in their learning environments and
will not need to be on guard against bigoted expression that may come their way.
Instead, this proposal serves as a direct breach of the constitutional right of all
American citizens to free speech. As long as no threat of violence is made to a person,
an institution, be it a university or government, has no right to impose punishment on
an individual speaking their mind, especially not in an academic context. To create an
atmosphere on college campuses where free speech is restricted can only serve as a
detriment to students who will finish their collegiate studies and enter the real world,
where there is no speech police to coddle them, unable to effectively refute arguments
that run counter to their views. Such a proposal not only contradicts core American
socio-political ideals, but it also undermines the goal of collegiate education: the

development of an astute critical thinker who can effectively refute opposing

arguments.
While the vocal minority advocates for policing of dialogue by universities, some
seek to strike a more conciliatory tone with a moderate approach to censorship.
Supporters of a moderate approach believe that implementing censorship of material in
the classroom, but leaving the out-of-class experience of college uncensored will not
directly impede free speech while at the same time helping students who find some
sensitive academic material offensive avoid emotional unease. While not encroaching
on the constitutional right of free speech for the individual, measures like this will still
impede the academic goal of undergraduate study. Students will still be coddled and
shielded from offensive and controversial historical, literary, psychological,
sociological, and political material and subject matters such as slavery, genocide, and
eugenics; all important negative themes in human history that must be studied and
understood to prevent their recurrence in our modern society. To erase such subject
matters from history books would diminish the value of a college education that must
be rooted in teaching future members of society how to respond to hatred and bigotry
with reasoned critique. Essentially, an entire generation of Americans will be lacking
the intellectual tools necessary to promote social change and justice in society.
The solution that serves the most benefit to the vast majority of students and
society on the whole, is the preservation of our right to free speech. Free speech isnt a
perfect concept; it does not shield individuals from offensive language and hatred, it
cannot prevent bigotry and irrationality from seeping into popular discourse, and it will

not erase the not-so morally pure history that we must all eventually come to grips
with. In some ways, free speech can almost seem detrimental, until further analysis
reveals its overarching benefits to a democratic society. Without a protected right to
free speech, governments can silence and oppress citizens who chose to voice their
unhappiness over policy, citizens would be unable to participate in democratic
deliberation and debate without self-censoring their words, and students especially
would lose their ability to impact society. The concept prevents institutions from being
given control over our thoughts and beliefs, allowing society to dictate how bigotry and
hatred are dealt with. Free speech underpins American, and by extension
Western-democratic, social ideals more so than any other legal concept and its
limitation on college campuses would be both unconstitutional and an inflation of
institutional authority. It is the role of students themselves to exercise their right of
free speech, as a part of our collective culture, to fight bigotry, racism, and the other
social failings that exist in society.
Free speech is under attack at American universities and as a result, our system
of higher education risks becoming a place where students are too easily offended by
the various shades of grey morality that permeate history and the present world around
them. Trigger warnings prime students for material that may offend their sensitive
psyches, professors self-censor their lectures to avoid making students uneasy, and
some university officials break under pressure to erase a school's past. Todays student
activists strive to see their ideological cause through a lens of polarized extremes,
duking it out in a battle over good and evil, instead of coming to grips with and

appreciating the ambiguous nuance of our academic studies and lives. Without free
speech, our society cannot function or improve and it is the role of you, the university
administrators, to help build the next generation of critical thinkers who will bring
positive change. Safe spaces and censorship will only serve to deteriorate the ideals
that have made our society so successful.

WorksCited
Berenson,Tessa."Exclusive:Yale'sDeanDefends'SafeSpaces'AmidCampusProtests."
Time
.
Time,9Dec.2015.Web.31Mar.2016.
Brait,Ellen."PrincetonStudentsDemandRemovalofWoodrowWilson'sNamefrom
Buildings."
TheGuardian
.TheGuardian,23Nov.2015.Web.31Mar.2016.
Lehr,Dick."TheRacistLegacyofWoodrowWilson."
TheAtlantic
.AtlanticMediaCompany,
27Nov.2015.Web.02Apr.2016.
Milligan,Susan."FromMegaphonestoMuzzles."
USNews
.U.S.News&WorldReport,25
Nov.2015.Web.31Mar.2016.