WRONG FORUM FOR DEBATE
When public discussion of politically or emotionally sensitive issues is banned in universities, it shifts to the nation’s editorial and letters pages, which have space constraints, time delays, vague terminology and dodgy facts ( Editorial, November 2). And those invested or merely opinionated individuals who have mastered the art of rhetoric threaten to drown out other informed and logical voices.
Universities and places with similar traditions of academic rigour, together with the media they manage, are the best places for such public discussion. Ideally, it should be dispassionate and respectful – but it must be robust, in the sense that no misstatement of fact, illogical interpretation, or vagueness of definition should go unchallenged or uncorrected.
The idea that a university is a corporate entity with the right to choose whom it excludes for whatever reason is an extreme libertarian concept. I would prefer to see such corporations take some responsibility to act in the public interest. George Henderson (Waitākere, Auckland)
Never has an Editorial made more sense. As a society, we are increasingly being stymied, criticised, bullied and harassed by protesters, those radical, violent, outspoken mobs of mainly youth who demand – and get – acres of publicity for their vehement views. Many in society are also being constantly put down by generations who have no idea what it is like to struggle; they are, more often than not, the privileged who appear to like the sound of their own voices. Green Party MP Chlöe Swarbrick is a prime example. She freely admits, boasts even, to having been raised to express her opinions and views around the dinner table and out in the wider community.
Coupled with a university education and exposure to radical views, there is a ticking time bomb for issues such as the decriminalisation of cannabis, global warming, anti-dairying, anti-meat, antiyou-name-it. In other words, anything that has made and still makes this country function and thrive is considered fair game.
We are even
being gagged, corrected and chastised from within our own families by younger generations who demand that older family members stop using gender-specific language, that we speak te reo Māori, that we stop “messing up” the planet.
I wonder, given a resurgence of fascism and other militancy, how many of the younger generation, the protesters, would stand and fight for their country if there was an attempt to invade New Zealand. Stand and fight – as did their grandfathers and great-grandfathers, Māori and Pākehā, shoulder to shoulder, fighting for freedom. Fighting for our lives. Now that’s worth fighting for. Margaret Arthur (New Plymouth)