The controversy surrounding Ahmadinejad's speech at Columbia is still roiling the campus and the legislature. Representative Duncan Hunter, a non-factor in the Presidential race, has threatened to cut all federal funding from Columbia for hosting the event. It's just not no-name presidential candidates hungry for airtime that are complaining. Conservative groups across the spectrum are complaining too.
The purpose of a university is the free exchange of ideas. Conservatives, rightly, complain that conservative ideas and ideals are stricken from the marketplace of ideas. This undermines the function of the university, leads to de facto indoctrination, and even causes the atrophy of "liberal" thought because it never has to defend itself. In such a system of censorship, everyone loses.
Here, the tables are turned. The president of Iran, a country we are likely to start bombing in the near future, was given a podium and a microphone on an American college campus. He had to face audience questions (and dodges them like the best of our own politicians). No one confused Ahmadinejad's speech with a political rally.
Now you have "conservatives" who once complained about censorship seeking to employ their own. It's one thing to disagree with having the speaker; it's another to make the extraordinary and unprecedented threat to strip a university of all federal funding and federal grants. No one has a problem with protests. However, we don't need some politician deciding what does or does not get to be said on a college campus. Hunter, by injecting himself into the debate this way, shows that he has more contempt for the United States, its Constitution and its people than Ahmadinejad.
A college campus exists so that all sides of an issue can be aired and debated. This is not fostered by limiting the information flow on a conflict with Iran to only information released by the White House Press Office. Ahmadinejad is a world leader, a key figure in current events, and he's the exact right person that should be giving a talk or two on a college campus. Students and academics should get the information first-hand, not sifted through the lens of the media.
Academic freedom and free speech in general, have plenty of means at their disposal to deal with unpopular or just flat out wrong ideas. Going hog-wild and shutting down talks because someone denies the Holocaust is what the Europeans do. It is alien to the ideals this country was founded on. Allowing people to speak freely exposes error far quicker than any government censor would.
In fact, the reasoned people who respect America's founding principles and emphatically reject Ahmadinejad's policy and rhetoric felt no need to start bringing down the hammer on anyone giving him a microphone. This quote from Mike Baker sums it up:
If you’ve heard him talk in the past, you could be pretty confident he was going to maintain his seat on the crazy train. In reality, our best defense against Ahmadinejad is to make sure he always has a microphone in front of him and the cameras are rolling. You would have to be psychotic, heavily medicated or enormously naïve to walk away from that speech thinking "… huh, seems like a reasonable and clever fellow.”
In fact, if he had been allowed to go to Ground Zero and display his antics there, there would be no debate about going to Iran and we'd already be halfway to Tehran by now.
The reality is, no one had to go to this talk. His ideas were forced on no one. People went because they wanted to go and it does not follow that they agree with what he said (I've been to many talks in which I disagreed with the speaker). It's one thing to disagree with those ideas, it's another to stomp your feet and demand censorship. The "conservatives" demanding sanctions on Columbia should spend their time learning the founding principles of this nation they claim they want to conserve.
John Bambenek is the Assistant Politics Editor for BC Magazine and is an academic professional for the University of Illinois. By trade, he is an information security professional, part of the Internet Storm Center and a courseware author and certification grader for the GIAC family of security certifications. He is a syndicated columnist who blogs at Part-Time Pundit and the executive director of The Tumaini Foundation which helps AIDS orphans and other children in Tanzania to get an education.
Rate this post:


Stumble It!











S Baker said,
The guy is an international criminal responsible for the mass murdering of thousands of people. Do we want Charles Manson to have a similar forum?? And Charles only directed the murder of a few hollywoodites.
September 28, 2007 at 1:15 pm
Lloyd Selberg said,
RE: “The purpose of a university is the free exchange of ideas. Conservatives, rightly, complain that conservative ideas and ideals are stricken from the marketplace of ideas. This undermines the function of the university, leads to de facto indoctrination, and even causes the atrophy of “liberal” thought because it never has to defend itself. In such a system of censorship, everyone loses.”
Obviously John hasn’t been on a university campus in the last several decades. The idea of free speech especially regarding gender is nonexistent.
Why would it take the threat of a federal freedom of speech law suit for a university to withdraw termination of employment of distinguished tenured professor in violation of sexual harassment policy for submitting a published response to a published letter to the editor in the university paper?
The argument is priceless and the response is typical of the humor one might encounter at MIT.
Current gun laws, wrote Ms. Kletter, allowed “criminals, youth, and the mentally disabled to quickly and easily kill as many random people as they want.” The science professor responded, “I just want to point out, that Kletter’s ‘easy access’ to a vagina enables her to ‘quickly and easily’ have sex with ‘as many random people’ as she wants.”
September 28, 2007 at 11:32 pm
Thom said,
The free exchange of ideas is a worthwhile goal. But what happened at Columbia was not that at all. Glenn Beck has the best response to his speaking at Columbia that I heard. He noted the press response in Iran that said (and likely had photos to back it up) that the Iranian president was greeted with applause by the American audience. As he said, and I agree with, the whole thing was a propaganda piece for Iran.
If Columbia University really wanted to promote free speech, we’d see conservative leaning groups get access to the campus. Till that happens, I’ll classify them in the useful idiot category.
September 29, 2007 at 7:16 am