UC Berkeley riot raises questions about free speech – The Mercury News

BERKELEY UCBerkeley has been long heralded as the birthplace of the countrys free speech movement. But after violent protests this week forced the school to cancel the scheduled appearance of alt-right icon Milo Yiannopoulos, some are wondering if Berkeley is where free speech is hitting a roadblock.

After the protest on Wednesday evening by more than 1,500 demonstrators outside the Martin Luther King Jr. Student Union began to turn violent, instigated in part by what campus officials described as outsiders, the event was called off. On Thursday, the Berkeley College Republicans, who had hosted Yannopoulos appearance, summed up their disappointment this way:

The Free Speech Movement is dead, the group said in a statement posted on its website. Last night, the Berkeley College Republicans constitutional right to free speech was silenced by criminals and thugs seeking to cancel Milo Yiannopoulos tour. Their success is a defeat for civilized society and the free exchange of ideas on college campuses across America.

var _ndnq = _ndnq || []; _ndnq.push();

The group thanked the campus police and university administration for doing all they could to ensure the safety of everyone involved. It is tragic that the birthplace of the Free Speech Movement is also its final resting place.

While the rest of the world may see student protesters as the ones behind the violence, campus officials on Thursday said non-students had hijacked what otherwise would have been a peaceful protest. And they referred pointedly to the fact that the Berkeley campus has been and will remain a bastion of protected speech, no matter what part of the ideological landscape its practitioners may inhabit.

We are proud of our history and legacy as the home of the Free Speech Movement, UC spokesman Dan Mogulof said Thursday. While we have made clear our belief that the inflaming rhetoric and provocations of Mr. Yiannopoulos were in marked opposition to the basic values of the university, we respected his right to come to campus and speak once he was invited to do so by a legitimate student group.

Mogulof said the violent protesters had waged an assault not simply on the physical campus, but on the free-speech ideals enshrined at UC Berkeley, which stands for and helps to maintain and nurture open inquiry and an inclusive civil society, the bedrock of a genuinely democratic nation. We are now, and will remain in the future, completely committed to Free Speech as essential to our educational mission and a vital component of our identity at UC Berkeley.

Berkeley MayorJesse Arreguin, a Cal graduate, also weighed in, saying in a statement that the free-speech traditions dont stop at the campus border, and he blasted the violent protesters for their actions.

I represent a city that stands united for community, for inclusion, and for a peaceful dialogue about the issues, and that stands united against bigotry, united against fear mongering, and united against violence towards anyone, said the mayor. For our community to be a beacon of light in these dark times, we must display our values of inclusion, keep each other and our community safe, embrace our right to peacefully assemble, and show the rest of the country our values in both speech and in action.

Some who were on hand for the protest were conflicted upset that the universitys actions were a black eye for free speech, but recognizing that the level of violence erupting outside the venue dictated at the last minute that the event be stopped.

The Free Speech Movement started here and now we cant let certain people speak? said UC Berkeley student Danny Phan. Thats kind of hypocritical. In a way, I see the schools decision as going against free speech, but I also think they were justified in cancelling the speech because I was there and saw the people wearing masks burning things and smashing windows. If theyd let the speech go on, it would have gotten a lot worse.

Phan wondered whether the schools real mistake was not in shutting the event down but in not being properly prepared for trouble. While free speech has taken a hit here, I dont think its dead, said the political-science major. The next time, though, the school should be better prepared. It was these third-party actors, not us students, who sabotaged everything.

The university knewfor weeks that Yiannopoulos appearance could prompt violent protests that could in turn threaten the schools long tradition of facilitating free speech at every turn. In a statement last week, Chancellor Nicholas Dirks wrote that the concerns around the upcoming visit of a controversial speaker to campus make it necessary for us to reaffirm our collective commitment to free expression, calling the university a site of open inquiry and learning.

Referring to Berkeleys commitment to free speech, he said the school has gone so far as to defend in court the constitutional rights of students of all political persuasions to engage in unpopular expression on campus.

And that expression, he wrote, would include Yiannopoulos, whom Dirks called a troll and provocateur who uses odious behavior in part to entertain, but also to deflect any serious engagement with ideas. He has been widely and rightly condemned for engaging in hate speech.

Dirk said last week that the school was working closely with police to prepare, to ensure the event goes as planned, and to provide for the safety and security of those who attend, as well as those who will choose to protest Yiannopouloss appearance in a lawful manner.

On Thursday, school officials did not respond to questions about those preparations and whether officials had failed to properly protect free speech on campus by having enough police officers on hand to prevent violence from interfering with the speech.

In a statement, campus police officials said the appearance by Yiannopoulos was cancelled amid violence, destruction of property, and out of concern for public safety.

Of paramount importance this evening was the campuss commitmentto ensure the safety and security of those attending the event, the speaker, those who came to engage in lawful protest, as well as members of the public and the Berkeley campus community, the police said.

The release described fires that were deliberately set, one outside the campus Amazon outlet; Molotov cocktails that caused generator-powered spotlights to catch fire; commercial-grade fireworks thrown at police officers; barricades pushed into windows and skirmishes within the crowd were among the evenings violent acts.

Alan Schlosser, Senior Counsel with the ACLU of Northern California, said that without knowing precisely what sort of public-safety threats prompted Cal police to act it was difficult to assess their decision. But he said the university has a clear obligation to provide controversial speakers the right to speak and not to cave in to threats or disruptions, say, by hecklers.

In this case, he said, the university knew beforehand about the threats and did not give in to them by cancelling the speech in advance. And it does seem that the actions last night went beyond simply being threats of disruption. If people there opposed to the speaker created a truly dangerous situation, then the university was within its rights to cancel the speech.

No speaker has an absolute right to speak if the protests triggered cause an imminent danger to people, said Schlosser. I just dont know if things last night reached that point.

Staff writers Rick Hurd and Katy Murphy also contributed to this story.

Here is the original post:
UC Berkeley riot raises questions about free speech - The Mercury News