Words have consequences

The Ann Coulter debacle has unleashed a firestorm of debate on freedom of expression and the role of Canadian universities as places of higher learning. The sides which have emerged in the debate are alarmingly (but not unexpectedly) polarized: once again, drawing a sharp line of division between the “left” and “right”. I am choosing to ignore the cries from the left that “bawwwww this is offensive”, and the right’s shout that “we should all be allowed to say whatever we want without consequence”.

Because first of all, what we say isn’t without consequence. It is so incredibly crucial that while recognizing the right to freedom of expression, we must also be cognizant of the results that may stem from what we say. It is absolutely irresponsible and indeed, stupid, to believe that any action which stems from our speech is not (at least partially) our fault. Mill himself says that liberty to speak should be curbed under the possibility where it may incite violence and harm. Bigotry isn’t dangerous because it’s offensive, it’s dangerous because it fuels hate and leads to violence.

Secondly, universities as a bastion of debate and higher learning? Setting the current U of Ottawa situation aside, universities have already become a less than ideal location for debate. See my entry in Old Sock Drawer on the value of erudition today, and what it subsequently means for the path in pursuit of a university education. The problems facing university in re-establishing itself as a location where debate and ideas should be tossed back and forth freely run far more deep-rooted than the present problem at hand. I’m not sure getting incendiary speakers will spark debate if debate itself is dulled in the classroom where education is seen as a means to an end.

And that’s just my two cents for today.