Free Speech Under Assault Across Virginia

Threats to freedom of speech grow by the day in the Old Dominion. Consider the latest news stories:

  • VCU Protesters broke up a speech by pro-life activist Kristan Hawkins with chants and obscenities. Two pro-lifers suffered minor injuries in a fight that broke out. VCU police broke up the fight but canceled the event.
  • More than 7,000 faculty and students at George Mason University have signed a petition to disinvite Governor Glenn Youngkin from delivering the university’s commencement address.
  • Matt Walsh, a conservative pundit critical of the trans movement, has postponed a speech at Washington & Lee, where a campaign to disinvite him had taken root.

Of these, the most worrisome for Virginians is the VCU protest. GMU President Gregory Washington has held firm so far on the commencement invitation, so it appears that Governor Younkin will not be canceled. And it appears that Walsh’s decision was influenced by death threats arising from the deadly shootings at a Christian school in Nashville, where he lives, not from anything happening at W&L. But there is no avoiding the fact that the enemies of free speech are getting bolder and more assertive.

The VCU incident was the most disgraceful, and it sets a new low in Virginia.

Students for Life at VCU had invited Hawkins to speak. The event was open to the public and held in the student commons. Of the 70 or so people in attendance, a large number were abortion-rights supporters. They held signs and chanted obscenities. Hawkins tried to engage with hostile members of the crowd, but none were interested. After a half hour of yelling, the protest escalated into a fight. At that point VCU police intervened to break it up.

Here’s the kicker: The police asked Hawkins to leave. As Virginia House Speaker Todd Gilbert noted, VCU should have protected Hawkins’ right to speech rather than shut the event down.

The response of the VCU administration was lame. VCU spokesman Michael Porter said the university was “disappointed” that the event had been disrupted. “VCU is committed to promoting a safe environment for our students, faculty and visitors so that the right to gather and speak freely is protected. We must extended dignity and respect to others, especially those with whom we disagree.”

Porter said the right words. But what about VCU’s actions? It appears that VCU police did not intervene until the situation turned violent, and then told Hawkins to leave. They allowed the protesters to cancel the event.

And what what about VCU President Michael Rao? As far as I can tell, Rao has yet to make a public pronouncement on this grotesque violation of free speech at the institution he leads and for which he sets the tone. He is acting as if the protest had never happened. The administration’s news outlet, VCU News, features a gag April Fool’s Day story today speculating whether Rao and VCU’s Rodney the Ram mascot are one in the same.

The VCU student code of conduct states that students need to “respect the rights and property of others,” and “be open to others’ opinions.” In a March 2020 missive, Provost Charles Klink reiterated that “every member of the VCU community has the fundamental and unalienable right to free speech. This is true even when we find that speech to be abhorrent and antithetical to our core values as a university.”

In light of Thursday’s fiasco, those words ring hollow.

VCU police were present at the event, so the police department apparently was aware of the potential for conflict. At the University of Virginia and other institutions, when protesters threaten to shut down a speech, university representatives give a warning to desist in the disruptive behavior. If that doesn’t work, a representative of the police gives a warning. If that doesn’t work, then the police intervene to remove the protesters. That’s the policy at least.

It’s not clear from scattered media reports — mostly conservative media — if VCU police followed that protocol. It’s not clear if VCU police even have a protocol.

The VCU community deserves an explanation of how the disruption was allowed to happen and what Rao is prepared to do to ensure that it will never happen again.

Meanwhile, the voices of intolerance are growing louder and more assertive. Virginia’s population remains overwhelmingly passive — tut-tutting but doing nothing. Perhaps the silent majority thinks that what happens on college campuses will stay on college campuses. That kind of thinking is delusional. Remember Edmund Burke’s immortal words: “Evil succeeds when good men do nothing.”


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

34 responses to “Free Speech Under Assault Across Virginia”

  1. Anderson Stone Avatar
    Anderson Stone

    If the governor is not welcome then cut off the state money!

    1. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      At the larger schools, it wouldn’t be missed, and a small price to pay to have possible cause to sue to remove a governor’s appointments to the BoV.

  2. LesGabriel Avatar
    LesGabriel

    The Provost did not say that what he heard or thought he was about to hear constituted ideas “abhorrent and antithetical to our core values as a university.” Although in his own words, it should not have made a difference, it would be instructive to know. For now he gets to live in a world where he gets to virtue signal that he believes in free speech but also virtue signal that he thinks pro-life ideas are beyond abhorrent. He shouldn’t be allowed to hve it both ways.

    1. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
      Dick Hall-Sizemore

      Why not? Saying that someone should be allowed to voice certain views and then saying that those views are abhorrent are not mutually exclusive positions.

      1. Nancy Naive Avatar
        Nancy Naive

        In fact, it’s almost a necessity.

  3. Turbocohen Avatar
    Turbocohen

    #DefundVCU

  4. vicnicholls Avatar
    vicnicholls

    I see a lot of worthless folks claiming to be on the right but do 0 when it comes to standing up for this.

  5. William O'Keefe Avatar
    William O’Keefe

    Doesn’t Michael Rao understand what a university is supposed to stand for and promote? His silence is just another example of his being a leader in wokism. He also must not be a strong supporter of the First Amendment or perhaps even the Constitution.

  6. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
    Dick Hall-Sizemore

    The events at VCU should not have played out the way they did. It is acceptable to picket a speaker with whom you disagree, but it is not OK to shut that speaker down with shouts and obscenities. And President Rao should strongly condemn those who disrupted the event and instruct the Campus Police to protect the right of those who have been invited to speak at college events.

    What I object to is the tendency of folks on this blog to imply that the left, “progressives”, or whatever term is used for those who have opinions opposite of this blog, have a monopoly on “voices of intolerance.” Those folks either have a short memory or ignorance of history. It was not that long ago that liberals or the left-wing were harassed and threatened. One example would be the protests against the Vietnam War. If you want some recent examples of conservatives trying to shut down opinions they don’t agree with, see: https://fee.org/articles/the-assault-on-campus-free-speech-doesnt-just-come-from-liberals/

    Two wrongs do not make a right. But neither side has a monopoly on virtue on this issue.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      “freedom of speech” does not guarantee that you can go anywhere to any venue and exercise your “speech”.

      And not even if the venue is a govt facility.

      Speakers have been hooted, heckled and shouted down for a long time – going all the way back to the founding fathers themselves!

      https://ivn.us/2012/06/26/americas-long-history-heckling-outbursts#:~:text=The%20night%20before%20his%20Gettysburg,If%20you%20can%20help%20it.%22

      Others also have “free speech” and they can exercise it at the same time you are exercising it and they do.

      I’ve watched many a Board of Supervisor meeting where people “free speech” was booted out the room. You get your 3 minutes, maybe… as long as you behave and then after that your mike is cut off and after that, a deputy comes for you. If you don’t have 3 minutes and stand up to exercise your free speech, you are immediately escorted out the room – cancelled – yes.

      This is a made up issue by folks on the right these days IMO.

      1. Donald Smith Avatar
        Donald Smith

        The left is trying to distract average folks from looking at the growing body of evidence, connecting the dots and concluding that the modern-day left is intent on shutting down speech it doesn’t like. IMO.

      2. CJBova Avatar

        Having to follow rules on public comment periods is not being cancelled. The rules are the same for those for and against a position.

        1. Nancy Naive Avatar
          Nancy Naive

          The rules? Oh yes, they’re the same.

          The application? Not so much.

          And yes, that would be an accusation that the rules are only applied in the keeping of the sensibilities of a late-aged white rural conservative, i.e., with bias.

          1. CJBova Avatar

            Anyone else looking to take over the job? Rural conservative? Twenty years rural and twice that in urban life in Philly, New York and L.A.

          2. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Suburban Philly, New York, and… well L.A. is all suburbs.

          3. CJBova Avatar

            Kensington, Feltonville, Oxford Circle were not suburbs. Part of NY in Little Neck for a year or two was, Court St. in Brooklyn, most certainly not, Canoga Park, Burbank, Glendale not suburban. Last place had a whopping 10,000 ft of property, but only there a couple of years. Sorry to ruin your theory.

          4. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            One has to wonder then, “ What’s a dazzling urbanite like you doing in a rustic setting and with zero Southern root, why the investment in and staunch defense of the Mathews monument to the Confederacy?”

          5. CJBova Avatar

            I’ve selfishly indulged this diversion for a bit of fun, and I will stop myself here. You make an assumption about my roots, and it’s a memorial to the war dead, not the Confederacy.

          6. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Sleep tight.

    2. Donald Smith Avatar
      Donald Smith

      Well Dick, the Vietnam War ended half-a-century ago. All the events Jim wrote about happened this week.

      If you want to assert that modern-day conservatives attack free speech with the same frequency and intensity as modern-day progressives do, be my guest.

      I’m not implying anything here. I’m asserting that modern-day progressives are much more prone to shutting down speech they don’t like than modern-day conservatives are, especially on college campuses. I base that assertion on lots of available data.

      1. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
        Dick Hall-Sizemore

        Check out the link I provided in my comment. It reports on contemporary efforts of conservatives to silence those with whom they disagree.

        I would like to see the data upon which you base your assumption.

        1. Donald Smith Avatar
          Donald Smith

          “I would like to see the data upon which you base your assumption.”

          Nope. Open your eyes and look around. It’s not my job or responsibility to convince you of anything.

          You make your assertions, I’ll make mine and we’ll let the audience decide who they find more believable.

    3. Donald Smith Avatar
      Donald Smith

      I can’t fault the activists for disrupting the event. They knew that Richmond has a progressive Democrat City Council, DA and media. So, they reasoned (correctly, it seems) that they could get away with this.

  7. Eric the half a troll Avatar
    Eric the half a troll

    Interested in why a group who is attempting to revoke the rights of one group should demand the group counter to them respect their rights…

  8. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    You do not have an unalienable right to deliver a commencement speech. The school’s job is to pick a speaker the graduates can enjoy. When that many students protest, the school chose unwisely.

    GMU pleased their law school and economics department at the expense of every other student.

    1. Where all those signatories students? How many were graduating? GMU has 35,960 students.

  9. Donald Smith Avatar
    Donald Smith

    Hi, I’m (insert name of candidate here). I’m tired of wokesters running amok in Virginia state colleges, and I’m especially tired of woke or spineless administrators who won’t do anything about it. If you elect me in November, I will make it my mission to hound these wokesters and try to run them out of our state college system. And, if they won’t go, then we’ll cut off their money. I’d rather pay for a policeman or nurse or teacher than a woke administrator, any day of the week. How about you?

    1. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
      Dick Hall-Sizemore

      So, you would “hound” those you disagree with and “try to run them out of our state college system.” How does that make you any better than the the progressives that you complain are trying to shut down speech they don’t like?

      1. Donald Smith Avatar
        Donald Smith

        Administrators who don’t stand up to these woke bullies are allowing the quality of state education to degrade. One of the most important things a state can provide its citizens is access to a high-quality higher education system. Taxpayers pay handsomely for that.

        These administrators are not doing their jobs. They are allowing a hostile environment to not only exist, but flourish. And taxpayers are paying them to do it.

        You’re also twisting my words—I hope you’re not doing it deliberately. I’m not calling for people I disagree with to be hounded out of public education. I’m calling for hounding out of public education administrators who won’t do their jobs, and who allow a hostile environment to exist on the campuses of state-supported universities.

  10. Apparently, President Rao issued the following statement to the VCU Board and “internal VCU audiences.” Jay E. Davenport,
    Vice President of Development & Alumni Relations, passed this along to an intermediary, who forwarded it to me.

    Two people were arrested Wednesday evening after there was disruption of an event in the VCU Student Commons. The student organization “Students for Life at VCU” invited a pro-life speaker to its meeting, which was open to the public and attracted about 70 people.

    The meeting was disrupted by the unruly conduct of some attendees, and VCU Police were called at about 5:40 p.m.
    VCU Police arrested Natalie Hoskins, III, 22, of Richmond and Anthony Marvin, 30, of Richmond. Hoskins was charged with simple assault and Marvin was charged with disorderly conduct. Neither is affiliated with VCU.

    VCU is committed to promoting a safe environment for our students, faculty, staff and visitors so that the right to gather and speak freely is protected. The overwhelming majority of events at VCU take place without incident, so we are disappointed that a student organization’s meeting was disrupted Wednesday night.

    We must extend dignity and respect to others, especially those with whom we disagree. VCU remains committed to free speech and civil discourse, values that strengthen our academic mission and our dedication to the success and well-being of our students, patients, faculty, staff and community.

    The bold face is either Rao’s or Davenport’s — I’m not sure whose.

    What’s interesting here is that Rao is drawing attention to the two outsiders who were arrested. That is a fact worth noting. But Rao has created an impression that is odds with the social media reports of the incident. “VCU Police were called at about 5:40 p.m. VCU Police arrested Natalie Hoskins, III…”

    That phrasing suggests that the police were called in and promptly made an arrest. That is not what happened. The police were present during much of the disturbance. The public should demand a more candid accounting of what happened that evening.

  11. Apparently, President Rao issued the following statement to the VCU Board and “internal VCU audiences.” Jay E. Davenport,
    Vice President of Development & Alumni Relations, passed this along to an intermediary, who forwarded it to me.

    Two people were arrested Wednesday evening after there was disruption of an event in the VCU Student Commons. The student organization “Students for Life at VCU” invited a pro-life speaker to its meeting, which was open to the public and attracted about 70 people.

    The meeting was disrupted by the unruly conduct of some attendees, and VCU Police were called at about 5:40 p.m.
    VCU Police arrested Natalie Hoskins, III, 22, of Richmond and Anthony Marvin, 30, of Richmond. Hoskins was charged with simple assault and Marvin was charged with disorderly conduct. Neither is affiliated with VCU.

    VCU is committed to promoting a safe environment for our students, faculty, staff and visitors so that the right to gather and speak freely is protected. The overwhelming majority of events at VCU take place without incident, so we are disappointed that a student organization’s meeting was disrupted Wednesday night.

    We must extend dignity and respect to others, especially those with whom we disagree. VCU remains committed to free speech and civil discourse, values that strengthen our academic mission and our dedication to the success and well-being of our students, patients, faculty, staff and community.

    The bold face is either Rao’s or Davenport’s — I’m not sure whose.

    What’s interesting here is that Rao is drawing attention to the two outsiders who were arrested. That is a fact worth noting. But Rao has created an impression that is odds with the social media reports of the incident. “VCU Police were called at about 5:40 p.m. VCU Police arrested Natalie Hoskins, III…”

    That phrasing suggests that the police were called in and promptly made an arrest. That is not what happened. The police were present during much of the disturbance. The public should demand a more candid accounting of what happened that evening.

    1. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      Clearly, the equivalent of driving a shiny new white Dodge Challenger into the crowd…

  12. I see a pattern proving once and for all that Euro-centric White supremacists are the root of all evil and violence against those they disagree with… oh wait…. never mind…..

Leave a Reply