MONDAY, former Sen. Rick Santorum addressed a group of students about the threat radical Islamic terrorism poses to the United States, about how the problem arose and about how the world is failing to combat it. The students who attended the talk seemed to come from one of two distinct groups: members of the sponsoring organizations, all of which are well-known conservative groups, or members of various groups assembled to protest the speaker. In watching and observing the actions and reactions of both sides before, during and after the talk, I found myself dismayed at the inability of the disparate groups to create a forum in which ideas could be exchanged freely without being ignored, dismissed or shouted down by people who entered with pre-conceived prejudices. From beginning to end, people of all points of view, some organized by interested groups and some merely out of personal dislike helped squelch an atmosphere of openness, an action unacceptable at a University that claims to support tolerance and the free exchange of ideas.
From the beginning, attendees impeded the exchange of ideas. Students protesting Santorum labeled him a dispenser of hatred before he even began to speak by dispensing flyers disparaging Santorum for his stances on unrelated issues, and taunting him for having lost his bid for re-election. This last jab especially shows disrespect for the speaker while failing to contribute anything to a discussion of radical Islam.
Finally, once Santorum actually began to speak, he was interrupted by a segment of the audience standing up and facing away from him, then by an outburst of applause meant specifically to de-rail his train of thought. The gesture of turning away demonstrates closed-mindedness of an even greater degree than that allegedly demonstrated by Santorum. This attitude toward the speaker suggests an immovable desire not to consider what he had to say. Whether Santorum's remarks were hateful is irrelevant; at least he had the courage to speak them publicly and allow others to critique them in a question-and-answer session. No one wants to hear that the struggle with Islamic terrorism will be difficult because of a cultural willingness to fight a longer conflict and a burning hatred for Americans adopted by the enemy, nor do we want to accept that if Santorum is correct our generation will have to shoulder a burden equivalent to that our ancestors faced in World War II. I admire him for his willingness to air opinions that are not going to be popular. This takes courage, and we ought to respect it.
Those students supporting Santorum do not get off scot-free here, either. Although not as ostentatious in their disrespect, they constantly interrupted questions that ran contrary to what they wanted to hear. People have the right to air their views, no matter what one thinks of them. If you disagree with someone's viewpoint in an open forum, let them air it, then refute. But we ought not repress another person's right to have their viewpoint made known. The worst moment for me came when one long-winded, off-topic questioner tried to force Santorum to discuss the Abu Ghraib prison scandals and I heard from behind me a voice mutter, "Let's beat him up after the talk." Although no doubt spoken in jest and directed at a question that was certainly not relevant, the attitude this comment suggests is frightening.
The real problem with the attitudes students demonstrated is that they completely destroy the purpose for which the forum was held in the first place. Santorum expressed explicitly that his goal was not to foster hatred, but to raise awareness about an issue that could have tremendous ramifications for American society. No matter how one feels about him personally, no matter which party he aligns himself with, everyone has a right to express himself or herself at the University. And if students fight against this right to expression, even if in doing so they believe they are fighting intolerance or an immoral viewpoint, they merely propagate the very thing against which they struggle.
Robby Colby's column appears Thursdays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at rcolby@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
WILLIAMS: Donald Trump will be a threat to student loan forgiveness
By Ryan Williams | 16 hours agoTo be sure, this is not a problem of the University’s making. Nevertheless, understanding the uncertainty of financial accessibility in education, the University must step up to the plate.
PATEL: Personal development courses support students beyond the gradebook
By Heer Patel | 5 days agoThe University must rethink its approach to education beyond traditional major-specific requirements and mandate personal development courses.
EDITORIAL: Commercialization threatens U.Va.’s educational mission
By Editorial Board | 6 days agoAfter all, measuring the University’s worth in terms of accrued capital, operational efficiency and numerical rankings molds this space into just another cookie-cutter institution.
