It’s not just conservatives and leftists who are outraged and speaking out against DePaul University’s decision to ban Daily Wire Editor–In-Chief Ben Shapiro from speaking; the two major Chicago newspapers have now published editorials condemning the decision.
The Chicago Sun-Times wrote:
It goes without saying, or so we thought, that a university should be a place of free, vigorous and often uncomfortable debate, not a place where unpopular views are squelched. It also goes without saying, or so we thought, that an enlightened college administration would never defend muzzling a speaker because of security concerns.
But DePaul University last week denied a request from a student group to bring conservative commentator Ben Shapiro to speak on campus … Somebody’s not showing much of a spine … A university by its nature should be a place where students weigh competing ideas and do their own analyses. The best response to a bad argument is a better argument.
Even the DePaul Democrats, who presumably don’t share Shapiro’s viewpoints, say he should not be banned from speaking on campus. Shapiro is a nationally syndicated columnist and a Harvard Law School graduate. As DePaul Democrats president Jack McNeil said, “In our democracy, opposing sides need to be heard.”
In an email to the Sun-Times, DePaul spokeswoman Carol Hughes explained that DePaul University’s Office of Public Safety, after observing events elsewhere, decided it could not “provide the type of security that would be required at this time.”
By that kind of thinking, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. would have been barred from many of his historic marches and speeches. Friday is the 50th anniversary of a major rally King led here in Chicago, so this might be an excellent time to ponder a question:
Should people who scream the loudest be allowed to dictate what the rest of us can hear?
The Chicago Tribune added:
DePaul University is struggling to process the idea that a college campus is a place to explore ideas, including controversial or disagreeable ones. The school has to figure out — quickly — whether to embrace the words of its president, the Rev. Dennis Holtschneider, who staked out a pro-free speech position in May. He described the gold standard for dealing with expression on campus: “Universities welcome speakers, give their ideas a respectful hearing, and then respond with additional speech countering the ideas.”
After noting the brouhaha when “trash-talking British journalist Milo Yiannopoulos, was shouted down by some audience members,” the Tribune continues, “The incident compelled Holtschneider, who steps down in 2017, to write a campuswide email in which he apologized to College Republicans for having the group’s speaker interrupted. Administrators and students, he said, “have some reflecting” to do about how to deal with appearances by divisive figures. Every action has a reaction, though, so a few days later Holtschneider apologized, again — this time to aggrieved students for “the harm that was unleashed by a speaker whose intent was to ignite racial tensions and demean those most marginalized, both in our society and at DePaul.”
“Shapiro is a nationally syndicated columnist and a Harvard Law School graduate. As DePaul Democrats president Jack McNeil said, ‘In our democracy, opposing sides need to be heard.’”
The Chicago Sun-Times
The Tribune writes:
Shapiro, editor of the Daily Wire, required a police escort at California State University at Los Angeles to give a presentation called “When Diversity Becomes a Problem.” Furious students tried to block his appearance. Someone pulled a fire alarm, according to the student newspaper. It sounds like a messy scene. As the alarm blared, Shapiro lit into his audience: “In America in 2016, you have to use the back door if you want to participate in free speech; you get to block the front door if you’re a member of the left.”
… DePaul, as a private Catholic university, can set its own rules on speaker invitations. But if it takes its role seriously as a place of learning and discourse, it should commit to respecting free expression — not with lip service, but with courage that becomes routine.