Between Free Speech and a Hard Place
THE president of the university faced a no-win situation. A controversial speaker had been invited to campus, alumni were in an uproar, members of the faculty were outraged, even local business leaders protested.
The university president responded with a fierce declaration of principle: “It is my view that as long as our students can be orderly about it they should have freedom to discuss any problem that presents itself and in which they are interested.”
The writer was Robert M. Hutchins, president of the University of Chicago. The year was 1932. The speaker invited to campus by a student group was the Communist candidate for president, viewed by many in that era as a national threat.
Controversial speakers have probably visited American campuses for as long as there have been campuses, and university officials faced with managing the situation have often reacted as Mr. Hutchins did, with a fervent defense of academia as a marketplace of ideas that must be kept unfettered.
Read entire article at NYT
The university president responded with a fierce declaration of principle: “It is my view that as long as our students can be orderly about it they should have freedom to discuss any problem that presents itself and in which they are interested.”
The writer was Robert M. Hutchins, president of the University of Chicago. The year was 1932. The speaker invited to campus by a student group was the Communist candidate for president, viewed by many in that era as a national threat.
Controversial speakers have probably visited American campuses for as long as there have been campuses, and university officials faced with managing the situation have often reacted as Mr. Hutchins did, with a fervent defense of academia as a marketplace of ideas that must be kept unfettered.