City backs free speech, public safety
Our city’s commitment to the fundamental principles of democracy — freedom of expression, thought and peaceful assembly — has been challenged in recent weeks with violent protests in the name of “free speech.” Any effort to conflate freedom of speech with violence is a dangerous proposition that undermines public safety and our democracy.
Our commitment to free speech is something we have held dear for 50 years and continue to preserve to this day. And while we cherish our freedoms of speech and assembly, there is no freedom to silence others or to commit violence.
The Berkeley Police Department has done an excellent job at addressing each unique event and learning from past experiences to ensure our residents, businesses and entire community are safe — a sentiment shared by many Berkeley residents. During the last two events — a March 4 pro-Trump rally and march at Civic Center Park and the April 15 clash of supporters and opponents in a city park — Berkeley police officers have made 30 arrests, confiscated dozens of weapons and implemented a number of rules to keep people safe and facilitate peaceful First Amendment activity.
Both the city of Berkeley and UC Berkeley administrators have worked to figure out how to make events featuring controversial speakers safe for all to attend. This includes holding events earlier in the day to prevent black bloc anarchist groups from using the cover of darkness to instigate criminal activities. This is not censorship, but simply a way to accommodate the needs of various parties and avoid violence. We cherish our city’s legacy as the birthplace of the Free Speech Movement, but this right must be weighed against the expectation of our citizens to feel safe.
While voices have sought to portray our city as intolerant of ideas contrary to our values, we have worked hard to protect the rights of everyone to be heard. Our city is rooted in the values of openness, equity, diversity and freedom of speech. Diverse viewpoints have always been welcome here. We may argue passionately, but this makes us stronger if done in a constructive way. If you want to challenge someone’s beliefs, start a dialogue and ask hard questions. If people want to protest against someone whose views they find abhorrent, they should take note of the actions of Martin Luther King Jr. or Mahatma Gandhi and do so in a peaceful, nonviolent manner.
I strongly disagree with hateful rhetoric wrongly promoting xenophobia and racism as solutions to our country’s problems. But in an open society, speakers of those views have a right to speak. Students and community members have a right to denounce that speech.
Building community and supporting all those who need help in this time — women, LGBTQ, immigrants and others — is an alternate solution that may have more impact.
My administration will work tirelessly to protect free speech and protect public safety. Anyone who says you have to choose one is accepting a false premise.