I would like to begin by thanking the Student Government, President Gitenstein, Provost Taylor, the Faculty Senate, and the Staff Senate for supporting this rally for open and peaceful dialogue and inclusion at TCNJ at a time when we are all struggling with a number of issues that could easily create divisions among us if not addressed proactively.
The protests that erupted in the past month at the University of Missouri, Yale, Ithaca, Claremont McKenna and other campuses focused our attention on the sense of marginalization and exclusion that many students of color feel. The source of these feelings have been racial slurs, insults, and insensitive tone-deaf remarks by classmates and some faculty members and an apparent lack of concern by some administrators over patterns of discriminatory harassment that make many students feel unsafe and unable to express themselves freely on their own campuses.
These sentiments and the problems that they spring from are not particularly new. The recent student protests reminded me of events that took place when I was a student attending Swarthmore College. What is now known as the “Crisis of 1969” began when a group of my black classmates took over the Admissions Office in January of that year in order to draw attention to their demands for a black admissions officer, more faculty and students of color, and for the creation of a Black Studies Program. While these particular grievances have now been addressed at my alma mater and many other colleges (BTW, Swarthmore recently inaugurated its 15th president -- an African-American woman by the name of Valerie Smith), and race relations and respect for diversity on campuses has generally improved in the decades since I attended college, the recent demonstrations provide evidence that many institutions still have more work to do in order to make all members of their campus communities feel safe, included, and valued.
The very nature of the mission of higher education, particularly at an inclusive and intentionally diverse public institution like TCNJ, requires that there be an atmosphere in which all people feel free to express themselves, to disagree and argue passionately, and to challenge the status quo. College administrators and faculty must strike the right balance between encouraging vigorous dialogue on the issues of the day without allowing speech to cross the line into harassment, discrimination, and the creation of a hostile educational environment.
The US Constitutional tradition gives the right to freedom of speech wide latitude, and derogatory or offensive remarks are protected forms of speech under the First Amendment. But freedom of speech is a liberty right that we must all learn to exercise responsibly. The law describes the limits of free expression in the broadest terms; but speech should also be moral and civil and it is our individual responsibility to ensure that it is.
One can think of the issue of limits on speech in terms of a set of nested circles. The First Amendment describes the outer circle delimiting forms of expression that are legally protected. But inside that circle there is another circle that describes ethical speech. There is a gap between these two circles in which we would find speech that is legal but unethical. For instance, it is considered legal but unethical to tell baldface lies, except in special circumstances such as when testifying in court under oath. In other words, while there is a legal permission to lie, there is also a moral prohibition against lying. The proper response when you think someone is lying is to call them out. The remedy for immoral speech is counter-speech.
Similarly, there is another circle inside the ethical sphere which has to do with manners and civility. It is also possible to engage in speech that is ethical but uncivil and ill-mannered, for instance, when one states a truth about another person but does so in a way that is insulting or demeaning. Both the law and ethics allow us to state unpopular, embarrassing, or offensive truths, but we should nevertheless generally refrain from deliberately offending others out of respect for civility.
Civility has an important value in helping to maintain a climate in which people feel safe and respected, however, speech codes at public institutions cannot prohibit uncivil speech because to punish it would violate First Amendment protections. But that just means it is up to every member of the community to take responsibility for ensuring that their own speech, and that of other members of the community, remains both ethical and civil. One does this by counter-speech, preferably by counter-speech that restores civility.
The law does, however, protect us against “discriminatory harassment,” which arises when the conduct in question is “so severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive that it effectively bars the victim’s access to an educational opportunity or benefit” (Davis v. Monroe County Board of Education, 526, U.S. 629, 1999). This is another matter altogether. In those instances where expressive conduct on college campuses rises to the level of discriminatory harassment, and school administrators do not take active steps to prohibit it and punish those responsible, then the right to protest this kind of unsatisfactory situation should be respected and the rest of us should stand in solidarity with those who stand up to defend their dignity.
Thankfully, I know of nothing happening on this campus that rises to this level, and hope that we will all resolve to work together to keep it that way.
Let me end these remarks by simply saying: “Beat Middlebury. Go Lions!”
Morton Winston
November 18, 2015
