Free speech is not an unfettered right
Political correctness vs. free speech battles on university campuses usually generate more heat than light. The latest episode is an exception.
Margaret Wente, retired columnist for the Globe and Mail, was named to the Quadrangle Society of Massey College, University of Toronto. More than 3,000 students, faculty, staff and alumni signed a petition saying she was the wrong choice, given (a) the allegations of plagiarism that have long plagued her, and (b) her inflammatory views on race, diversity, equity, etc.
Clearly miffed, Wente quit — fulfilling the wish of her critics. She said her record “speaks for itself” — it sure does for them as well.
That prompted other protests. She who had criticized others for years had been hounded out by criticism. “Cancel culture” had triumphed, free speech imperilled.
Then the chair of the college governing board quit. Colleen Flood — distinguished academic at the University of Ottawa — said she was taken aback by the grassroots backlash. “The depth of anger regarding her (Wente’s) writings is deeply linked to our lack of diversity.” Flood urged others to step down as well to “make way for more diverse appointments” to the 26-member board that has only two visible minorities, one a student.
This is the second clash between the older and younger generations at Massey. In 2017, Prof. Michael Marrus resigned as a senior fellow after an illthought out comment to a Black student about the master of the college, a title since changed to principal.
Wente is entitled to her views. So are her critics at an institution that fosters intergenerational dialogue and zero tolerance for plagiarism. Members of the Quadrangle Society — college friends and donors — are expected to mentor students, who are increasingly diverse, and want bigotry and racism tackled. Often free speech is presented as a one-way street — the right to make inflammatory or racist, myogenic, antiSemitic, Islamophobic or homophobic comments and to throw a hissy fit when challenged. That’s the nature of those not used to being challenged.
The most gratuitous insults and diatribes have been rationalized in the name of free speech, which is proffered — never openly, mostly in code — as a white majoritarian value that minorities don’t understand.
Free speech is not an unfettered right. The International Convention on Civil and Political Rights, our own Charter, and the charter of PEN International, the free speech group, all uphold free speech but also the right of people to be free from hatred and discrimination. The Supreme Court of Canada has repeatedly ruled for just such a balance.
Yet too many Canadians parrot American free speech absolutism. But the First Amendment — barring Congress from abridging free speech — has evolved into the “First-ness of the First Amendment,” undermining the right to equality and inclusiveness that was also an American ideal.
Free speech bromides — censure not censor; counter hate speech with more speech; defend the worst speech to protect speech for all — have surface appeal. They fail to address the reality such absolutism works well for the powerful and the organized, not the weak and the vulnerable, who must challenge systemic racism and bigotry with little or no resources.
Fidelity to free speech is also highly political:
Ideology, not principle is at play when universities, including American ones, disinvite speakers, fire or demote academics and administrators for making inappropriate comments, or not catering to student demands for “trigger warnings” and “safe spaces” about potentially disturbing content. Generally, it’s the conservatives who get exercised, not liberals.
Many free speech crusaders are accomplices in stifling criticism of Israel, labelling it hate speech. Even if it is, it’s odd to be suppressing that but not other forms of hate speech.
Free speech advocates did not go to bat for the right of Major League Baseballers Yunel Escobar or Kevin Pillar to be homophobic on the field. Yet they routinely do for Islamophobes.
Such inconsistencies reflect our values that are forever evolving. We no longer caricature certain peoples and groups. But racism and bigotry persist against aboriginals, Blacks, Muslims, Chinese and others. That’s what the Massey rebellion is about.
Invoking American free speech orthodoxy is the wrong response. Balancing competing rights, striving for inclusivity and dignity for more minorities is the Canadian way. Slow and uneven, yes. But less divisive and more equitable in the long run.