Cornell continues to make national news in the worst way possible. Wednesday evening, conservative commentator Ann Coulter ‘84 was shouted down during a speech in Myron Taylor Hall by a group of students who can only be described as children. Coulter’s cancellation is counter to everything our university stands for, and should inspire radical action from the Cornell administration.
In blatant disregard of a statement read by the university’s Associate Dean of Students Greta Kenney as the event commenced, hecklers used speakers, whistles, and chants to cause mayhem. In order to cause continuous interruption, they did so in ones and twos, preventing security from removing them en masse. The protestors continued for the duration of the event, despite further pleas from the University Dean of Students that they protest elsewhere.
This behavior is diametrically opposed to the purpose of the university, which is to foster the free exchange of ideas. This year, in what should be an oft-repeated welcome speech to the Class of 2026, President Pollack prioritized free speech, beseeching students to respect it:
You’re going to encounter a lot of new ideas here. Some of them will fascinate and inspire you. Some, you’re going to disagree with. And some, you might really hate. But what I want you to do– and it isn’t always going to be easy– is to listen to as many of them as you can. Don’t avoid people whose viewpoints you think are wrong. Don’t try to shout them down. Hear them out. Ask them questions. Put in the effort to understand their point of view.
The object of Coulter’s saboteurs was not to present an alternative point of view nor to disprove Ms. Coulter’s arguments, and certainly not to “hear her out.” They were there specifically to prevent the free exchange of ideas. They freely admitted that their goal was suppression of speech: one student shouted, “your words are violence…we don’t want your ideas here!”
But who is “we?” The hecklers purported to speak for the Cornell population, yet many Cornellians in that room did want to hear Ms. Coulter. By what right did these Cornellians claim authority to decide who “we” want to bring to campus?
Note the language, “we don’t want your ideas here.” The disruptor said the quiet part out loud: this cancellation was not only about Ms. Coulter’s identity, but about her ideas. Shouting her down was a deliberate attempt to make certain ideas unspeakable on campus.
Should conservatives begin drowning out every liberal speaker that is brought to campus? If people of one persuasion are permitted to shout over ideas they don’t like, it seems only fair that people of all persuasions be provided that weapon. But do we want our ideas to be decided by which side can shout the loudest? If every event can be shouted down and derailed by those who oppose it, campus discourse will quickly grind to a halt.
Worse, though hecklers love to chant “words are violence,” overriding speaker events may bring the possibility of actual violence. In one poll, the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) found that, “one in five students say it’s acceptable to use violence — even if only rarely — to stop a campus speech.” Another poll discovered similar rates of proclivity to campus violence, and found that two thirds of students support shouting down speakers. Numerous speakers across the country have been canceled due to threats of campus violence.
And precluding people from sharing their ideas through legitimate means may lead them to take extreme action. This week has already provided some examples.
During the Coulter speech, one audience member was so enraged at the protestors that he began yelling expletives at them. Afterward, in a particularly ugly demonstration on Thursday, protestors reportedly set up a likeness of Coulter on the Arts Quad and pelted it with pudding. The behavior of these students is astonishing, and unbecoming of scholars at an elite university. Haven’t these students been given the proper tools to deal with ideas they do not agree with?
If Cornell does not adequately address this issue, they will be failing at their fundamental purpose: to create a safe space where all perspectives may be shared. They seem to be on the right track so far. In response to the event, Vice President Joel M. Malina apologized to Coulter and promised, “All Cornell students among the disrupters will be referred for conduct violations.”
Good. But Cornell must be thorough. The students who interrupted the event should be punished by Cornell, and perhaps referred to as to the Ithaca Police Department as well. Cornell should consider suspensions, perhaps for multiple semesters. If Cornell can identify ringleaders or an organization that planned the disruption, they should face consequences too, excluding those who demonstrated peacefully outside the event. A university-wide email on the subject wouldn’t be a bad idea either. In order for Cornell’s campus to be a safe haven for everyone’s perspectives, it must not be a safe haven for silencers.
Correction: An earlier version misstated the office of Associate Dean of Students Greta Kenney.
