The Partnership of Speech
Freedom of speech isn’t meaningful if we aren’t willing to listen.
Most of us agree, at least in principle, that a stronger commitment to free speech on our campuses and in public life would be a welcome improvement over the tense and constrained environment we have endured for too many years. Yet conditions seem only to be worsening. The murder of Charlie Kirk on an American public university campus, as he engaged in the kind of peaceful, substantive debate we claim to want to foster, marked a new and horrifying low. Disturbingly, it was not received as such by a significant number of Americans, including some vocal academics who objected to Kirk’s being allowed to speak at all and who expressed open satisfaction at his removal from the scene. Many of the rest of us can only hope that this episode, and the growing acceptance of political violence, do not trigger a downward spiral that ultimately eviscerates the practice of free speech altogether.
It will take more than eloquent declarations to restore free speech on our campuses. What is required is a renewed commitment, especially from academic leaders, to the habits of mutuality on which free speech depends but which it cannot, by itself, sustain.