Censorship and the First Amendment
[From the Wall Street Journal
The appearance of Minuteman Project founder Jim Gilchrist was met with violence last week at Columbia University when the pro-enforcement hardliner attempted to address a Republican student group. The melee began just minutes after Mr. Gilchrist rose to speak, according to Columbia Spectator reporter Laura Brunts. "Two students in the International Socialist Organization unfurled a yellow banner reading, 'No human being is illegal!'" she reports -- which in turn prompted other protestors and Minuteman supporters to rush the stage.
Mr. Gilchrist was ushered off before he could finish his speech, but he did manage to taunt the hostile audience before the riot began. "Who's a racist now?" he asked, while hugging an African-American Minuteman member. "I love the first amendment!"
After the riot, one unnamed protestor told Ms. Brunts that the disruption was planned: "I don't feel like we need to apologize or anything. It was fundamentally a part of free speech.... The Minutemen are not a legitimate part of the debate on immigration."
...In a statement released by the Minutemen afterwards, Mr. Gilchrist described the incident as "yet another indication that those who support illegal immigration are happy to use communist tactics in their intolerant determination" to deny his group their First Amendment rights.
Would you describe the actions of the students who stormed the stage in protest as "communist tactics?" Is storming the stage in protest an appropriate use of the Freedom of Speech guaranteed by the First Amendment? If you side with the students and defend their decision to rush the stage and silence the representative from The Minutemen project, how do you justify your position? What are the most effective forms of protest? Is it ever wrong to express your opinion?
[Update: here's a video of the event:]
(Somewhat) Similar Posts:
The March 19, 2007 issue of Fortune magazine had an interesting article by Roger Parloff (read his blog entry here) about the recent stir surrounding...From FOXNews.com: The filmmaker who ate nothing but McDonald's meals for a month for his Oscar-nominated film "Super Size Me" gave a profanity-laced, politically incorrect speech...I recently wrote both senators from Washington (Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell) encouraging them to support the important debate surrounding legislation adding an additional amendment...Dear ______________: Thank you for contacting me to express your support for a proposed Constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman. ...
October 10th, 2006 at 6:36 pm
I wasn’t present at the Columbia when it happened but I saw the foxnews interview with the Leader of the club that disrupted the speech. The behavior of the disruptors was ridiculous. Columbia should be ashamed. I would expect some kind of academic probation levied against those who rioted.
October 11th, 2006 at 12:37 am
To me it’s a “fight fire with fire” approach. The girl they interviewed on Foxnews was an idiot. Every time the interviewer asked her if she thought storming the stage was appropriate she responded with things like “do you think shooting immigrants is appropriate?” Her point may be valid in the broad immigration debate, but it is totally invalidated by their protesting strategies. It’s the classic Thought Police example of how to protest incorrectly.
I like what Bill O’Reilly had to say about it: