News

Harvard Quietly Resolves Anti-Palestinian Discrimination Complaint With Ed. Department

News

Following Dining Hall Crowds, Harvard College Won’t Say Whether It Tracked Wintersession Move-Ins

News

Harvard Outsources Program to Identify Descendants of Those Enslaved by University Affiliates, Lays Off Internal Staff

News

Harvard Medical School Cancels Class Session With Gazan Patients, Calling It One-Sided

News

Garber Privately Tells Faculty That Harvard Must Rethink Messaging After GOP Victory

The Rindge Lockout

NO WRITER ATTRIBUTED

Every three or four years, the Cambridge School Committee goes on the war-path against freedom of speech and axes a speaker that some Harvard group has invited to talk in Rindge Tech.

What sets the Committee off is not easily discovered. Madame Nhu, Floyd McKissick, and a host of other controversial speakers have passed muster with the Committee. But in 1959 the group balked at Fidel Castro, and in 1963 a few members suggested informally that Gov. Ross Barnett of Mississippi should speak elsewhere (he did). Last week, the Committee vetoed a speech by Stokely Carmichael.

It is simply outrageous that the School Committee should feel it necessary to decide which speakers are fit to address Harvard audiences--or anyone else. The Rindge Tech auditorium happens to be the largest one around Harvard. If a Harvard club asks to use it for a speaker, the reason is obviously that the group believes a great many people will want to hear the man's views first-hand. They should be able to.

Respect for the free exchange of ideas--if not the simple courtesy of letting students use a convenient facility--should be enough to dissuade the School Committee from barring a particular speaker whenever it feels the urge. The Committee should reverse the decision on Carmichael, and refrain in the future from making another like it.

Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.

Tags