In regard to a Review column defending Professor Rickford’s ability to freely speak without consequences, I wholeheartedly agree that students and professors alike should be allowed to say what they want without fear of repercussions. This is vital to a thriving and successful campus culture, where the exchange of ideas is free flowing.
However, there are certain forms of speech that should be strongly condemned by the University to maintain a safe campus. This includes glorifying and encouraging violence against a minority group. Professor Rickford’s comments that the October 7th attacks on Israel were “exhilarating” and “energizing” warrant a strong response from Cornell in order to deter future threats, and potential violence against students.
Professor Rickford was not condemning Israel for its actions, or arguing for a specific policy or opinion, all of which is protected speech. Instead, he was openly encouraging and supporting violence against Jews in Israel and across the world.
In his speech, Professor Rickford stated that, “It [the attack] was exhilarating it was energizing! And if they weren’t exhilarated by this challenge to the monopoly of violence, by this shifting of the balance of power, then they would not be human!”
Supporters of Rickford claim that his comments were taken out of context. Rickford was simply referring to the shifting balance of power for what made him exhilarated and energized. And yet, this so called shift was caused by the raping of Jewish women, shooting of children and elderly in their homes, and beheading of babies in Israel. Being exhilarated and energized by a change whose root cause is extreme violence is in of itself condoning said violence. Just as when people shout, “resistance is justified when people are occupied,” Professor Rickford comments create an atmosphere where violence is an acceptable form of protest, particularly against Jews and Jewish students at Cornell. This is why it is necessary for Cornell to step in and send the message that this type of rhetoric is unacceptable.
Cornell’s Hostile Work Environment
If after the wrongful killing of an African American, a professor at Cornell had stated that he was “exhilarated” and “energized” by the shifting of balance of power in America from the murder, that professor would be fired. Period. The professor would be condemned not only for their hateful speech, but also for glorifying violence against African Americans and creating a hostile environment on campus. A professor who glorifies violence against a minority group should not be welcome on our campus. While I strongly believe that specific words or speech should not be banned, the University must equally condemn anti-semitism as it has forcefully condemned other forms of bigotry in the past.
By law, we are limited in what we can say without being punished. The first amendment guarantees free expression up until threats or incitements of violence. And while it is debatable whether Rickford’s comments are a clear incitement of violence, they undoubtedly create a hostile working environment for students and professors alike, which can be prosecuted by law. A hostile work environment is created where there is evidence of discriminatory harassment based on race, age, sex, religion or any other protected class. By not dealing with Professor Rickford in a clear and forceful manner, the University condones this praise of violence, and creates a hostile work environment on campus.
I greatly admire the column author’s principled stance on free speech. However, speech inciting violence on campus is highly troubling for the safety of Cornellians. Further, there is a clear sense of hypocrisy from Cornell and other elite colleges that needs to be addressed; calls for the genocide of Jewish students on campuses may constitute harassment “depending on the context.” Cornell must send a clear message that glorifying violence towards any minority will not be tolerated under any circumstances, for the safety of all students.
