Free Speech is a right that is not afforded to many people across the globe. Arrests of journalists and ordinary citizens who overstepped their limited rights of expression are commonplace around the world. Countries like the U.S, France and Germany are very much in the minority in terms of the level of freedom of speech and expression granted to their citizens. In the U.S, freedom of speech is a constitutional right of the people that cannot be taken away unless the speech in question does not fall under specific criteria. Forms of speech such as libel and slander fall under said forms of speech that courts do not look favorably upon. This raises the question: are colleges better grounds for protests compared to general public protests?
On the colleges side, controversial speakers such as Ben Shapiro and Milo Yiannopoulos have their speech protected. This also holds true for public protests such as the protest at Charlottesville, in which a white supremacist group had the right to assembly as outlined in the First Amendment of the U.S Constitution. In both cases, protesters are protected by US law until they cause extreme unrest and harm to the others, as seen in the Charlottesville incident when somebody died and the protester who killed an innocent American was held in legal contempt for his actions.
In light of violent protests like Charlottesville, some student protesters support doing away with several of the protections that are currently afforded to controversial material, according to a Gallup poll. This ties into the leading question, for it highlights the peril of definitively claiming that one form of protest is better than other. College protests are good in that the central office of the college is caught up in the middle of the action, which often results in the college changing to suit the needs of its students. According to an article from the Washington post regarding the aforementioned Gallup poll, however, “The poll of 3,000 U.S. college students found that they generally endorse the ideals of free speech and campuses that encourage the discussion of a variety of ideas. But once that speech begins to infringe on their values, they’re likely to support policies that place limits on speech. Those include free-speech zones, speech codes and prohibitions on hate speech. Only a slight majority (53 percent) think that handing out literature on controversial issues is ‘always acceptable.’” This information is jarring, especially considering that the liberal slant of many US institutions would not suggest a general willingness to allow and even look favorably upon some sort of legislation that can place limits on free speech.
Public protests that are not collegiate in nature, on the other hand, are better in that the protesters tend to get more publicity and have larger numbers of participants. On the flip side, the police involvement is still high and there is a greater inherent risk in participating in such a protest as at some point with sufficient numbers, the police forces are not properly able to keep people with conflicting views from clashing and this may result in the outbreak of violence. In the end, however, I conclude that college protests are better than general public protests, for they provide students with an easy way to rally and gets their voices heard, with their intent aimed directly at the source of their plight. To put it succinctly, college protests are generally more centralized and effective.
Article by Moco Student staff writer Yeabsira Moges of Wheaton High School