Keep Talking

At the Junior Parents Weekend panel on diversity, Zaheer R. Ali '94 told audience members that it is important for students to hear a wide range of viewpoints--even if some are controversial. We agree wholeheartedly with Ali's principles. And we recognize, even if Ali doesn't, that they must be applied universally.

A coalition of minority students, led by Ali, is now demanding that Thomson Professor of Government Harvey C. Mansfield Jr. apologize for his recent statements about Black students and grade inflation. The coalition also asks that President Neil L. Rudenstine and Dean of the faculty Jeremy R. Knowles apologize for their failure to reprimand Mansfield.

Many students found Mansfield's controversial analysis of grade inflation--in which he links the phenomenon to the influx of Black admittees in the 1970s--hurtful and insensitive. Whatever the merits of Mansfield's arguments, their concerns are understandable.

Yet this outspoken academic certainly isn't the only public figure to raise students' ire recently. In February, D. Khallid Muhammad, who appeared at a conference sponsored by the African American Cultural Society, made inflammatory statements about gays, Jews, whites, and Black Harvard faculty members. And last year, Leonard Jeffries, a City University of New York professor known for his racist views, was invited to speak in Sanders Theatre.

Both speakers outraged and offended many students, and unleashed floods of written and verbal protest. Fortunately, neither was prevented from speaking.

To limit first amendment rights in any way--whether by censoring a speaker, demanding a public apology, or acting in a way that intimidates them so that they refrain from speaking freely--sets a dangerous precedent in an academic community. Asking for an explanation of a statement is fine. But publicly calling upon the administration to reprimand a faculty member will intimidate those less bold than Mansfield (most everybody) and lead to an insidious self-censorship. No student, faculty member or administrator should feel repressed on the basis of vague and flexible standards of "offensiveness." Free speech must be paramount, for free speech gives us the ability to listen to arguments on both sides, to engage in and encourage real debate. The stifling of unpopular opinions or analyses harms out community and hampers our education. As Mansfield himself said, "The University is about the search for truth. Our motto is Veritas. It isn't about feeling good."

If people disagree with Mansfield's statements, or if they feel hurt by those statements, they have ample recourse--in free expression itself. In an interview with The Crimson earlier this month, Ali called for students to "exercise their freedom of speech...and refute [Mansfields'] statement." He's exactly right. After Jeffries' and Muhammad's speeches, students talked and wrote extensively. At the time of Jeffries' speech--exercising their right not to listen.

Students offended by Mansfield's statements shouldn't hope to quiet him. Instead, they should question and argue. They should ask for clarification and for empirical evidence. They should engage in dialogue. And they should feel secure that they, too, have the right to express any opinions--no matter how unpopular.