Skip to main content

tv   Discussion on Freedom of Expression on College Campuses  CSPAN  January 3, 2022 8:02pm-9:06pm EST

8:02 pm
also head over too for scheduling information or to stream video live or on-demand any time. c-span your unfiltered view of government. former governor of washington state in june douglas of vermont. joint experts on freedom of expression on college campuses. bipartisan policy center hosted this hour-long event. >> hello. director of the campus speaks special bipartisan. i'm glad to welcome you to today's conversation about a new roadmap academic leaders task force.
8:03 pm
university of a special role to play in our democracy. the values and mutual respect preparing the next generation for leadership. our principles academic freedom open exchange emulate many college campuses making it harder to fulfill their academic. today's report is a direct report. the report is of strategic guide fostering open exchange during this period of polarizationon and the task force was comprised of a dozen members including a recent college graduate, other academic readers from a wide range of college campuses and universities historical black colleges andrs universities, and
8:04 pm
faith-based institutions. the task force has met virtually to discuss these issues about their solutions work on their campuses. these issues about navigating disciplines and practices in staying in diverse community. virtually everyone in the community feels welcomed. just a few words in white we are working with campuses. the center is in washington d.c. think tank. the best opportunities for both parties for american families. that is been a real challenge.
8:05 pm
we work with campus leaders to prepare the next generation to be partisan leaders constructive compromise. ♪ ♪ >> what you give us an idea? you tested, you share it, open it up to criticism. you refine it and you implemented. right now, freedom of expression is losing ground on college campuses across the nation for student should be exposed to new ideas taught to think independently. it is free to not sharing that helps us progress as a nation. that's why the bipartisan policy center's work with colleges and universities across the country to foster free expression but learn morepr about how to tackle these issues at bipartisan policy .org backslash campus free expression. >> conversations about report and other academic
8:06 pm
excellence. our conversation is been moderated before interest to present a few words about her shepherd president daniels will moderate to conversations, the loan moderatedd conversation college professor and will be joined by university vice president for inclusion and diversity. we'll have 15 minutes for questions and answers and i encourage you in the audience to make your comments about this conversation and your question for the panelists. and now and it my pleasure to introduce president daniels is
8:07 pm
a scholar of economics. he's a president of john hopkins university in 2009 his provost at the university of virginia and dean of the faculty of law at the university of toronto. his book, with the universities of democracy of higher education institution preserving the values of liberal democracies joining us president daniels, thank you very much and over to you. >> thank you so much, it is a real pleasure and privilege to be here today. and really honored to be joined here today by the co-authorsrs of the academic leaders task force on the expression. governor douglas and governor, chris as you know served two terms of governor of washington and chaired the national governors association. she is now ceo of challenger
8:08 pm
seattle, an alliance of ceos of the nation's largest private sector employees. jim douglas served four terms as governor of vermont. he served too as chair of the national governors association. and he is now executive president, executive in residence at millbury college, his alma mater. thank you governors for being here. but more than that, for joining this task force in the very important contribution that you are making to our sector into debate more generally within the country. so with that said, a simple starting question. whatever possessed you to take on a relatively uncontroversial issue, seldom in the news issue like free expression on university campuses? who wants to start? i am going to the law professor's prerogative, governor douglas. >> thanknk you president dennis ring part of the conversation today right now i speak in behalf of my colleague and
8:09 pm
thinking all the norms of the task force against the generously of their time and expertise. i am spending time on the collegee campus so i see it up close and personal. i have become concerned about what i see and the change on campuses and roughly the last half-century. our local hero, calvin coolidge among others of the progress of a college education is to teach people not what to think that how to think. according to some recent polling and data the american people do not believe in substantial numbers that is happening. the poll suggests only half of americans believe colleges are teaching young people how to think independently. there is a division politically70 there too. 70% of democrats think colleges are doing a good job. only 40% of republicans do. i couldti not think a better organization than the bipolar
8:10 pm
seat center with whom i've worked with good friend chris on other projects over the past few years to take this on. and address the decline in public trust. because the universities where the next generation of leaders is trained to participate in citizenship be on the campus. that citizenship is going to require exposure to a lot of diverse points of view. we need to ensure they are equipped to provide the leadership of our country is going to need. so, that is what motivated me and i am delighted we are to point for this report. >> thank you. governor,. >> adjoint my colleague jim douglas is a thank you came to asked to consider this came
8:11 pm
from an incident it was january 2, 2017 and the president of the university received a petition to overrulele the students. and not allow the speaker. she also the petition to reinforce the speaker should not be allowed to attend. unfortunately it ended up the victim and the perpetrator were not faculty or campus members at all. it did evolve out of the demonstration. the conclusion that was drawn by the community at large, was that of the academic around this as evidence of a growing problem with regards to freedom of speech. and in fact the question that
8:12 pm
was asked, does it cause a threat to the safety and security of college campuses? or was a terrible conclusion to draw instead i felt the conclusion better to be drawn was if there threatening freedom of speech then our college campuses in whole country is being threatened. so like jim i took this to the bipartisan policy councils and iid am concerned. what's the president of the university of washington stand alone with no support once incident took place. be pummeled from every conceivable direction. thatua was january 2017. the protest against the speaker on the incoming president. it only got harder got more polarized. e so clearly that was not the beginning but evidence of a trend that was going to take us out a really troubling path. they said let's gather
8:13 pm
together the best and brightest in the country. let's see if we can help college presidents and do something about this for the very reasons jim just described.el >> went to pick up the point you just made that have not just in the last several years but as you said over the last several decades. the question i would ask of both of you is to the extent we see increasingly a much more polarized country and increasingly diversity of viewpoints across campuses, that are hard to reconcile. i would b be interested, given your bipartisan instincts could you say something about how you bridge across the differences? in particular i know the report is very concerned with that issue.
8:14 pm
i would be really interested in your lessons as a governors who have had to navigate, what can we as university presidents learn how we canet do this better? >> i would suggest two things. number one, university presidents don't have a choice but to lead on this issue. lead confidently and squarely. number two they cannot allow themselves to be left alone when a crisis or a problem arises set the culture and the value on the college campus that allows the civil discourse to take place and encourages it. provides the students and the faculty with how that can best be done. to engage not just with the students and faculty but to engage with the trustee so they are there when incident
8:15 pm
or problem should arise. to engage with their own community. at the end of the day being president of theen university came to can be a very lonely job. but does not have to be particularly in a crisis, but demandsem there be those who stand up and be supportive. really listening, opening the doors to do first thoughts, religions and all of that is a role model the presidents can play. i know it is not easy. it's not easy beingsy governor. but it is accomplishable even in these divided times i firmly believe it is possible but more importantly, i believe it is absolutely essential we have leadership on our college campuses public, private whatever they may be here is our culture, this is how we can provide the civil discourse and >> leadership for tomorrow in the
8:16 pm
country. >> thank >> thank you. some presidents are going to have to spend some capitol is going to require them getting involved in this on a personal basis. the name to ensure the e trustees as you know, have their back so in difficult circumstances arise they have that support. i guess it starts with adopting policies we have some tuition presidents and other campus leaders look for possible examples. but beyond that requires engagement. not justeq when the crisis occurs. it requires insuring student organizations and other campus leaders know what they're going to do when that difficult circumstance arises. it requires its clear statementee there is no conflict between free expression, diversity, equity and inclusion. sometimes people think there is but we want to make sure there is total inclusion of everyone including
8:17 pm
ideologically on our college campuses there is a very consistent goals. finally, if there is a difference or gap between the kind of views expressed on a college campus they will have to fill that gap by insuring different voices are heard. whether it's invitations to speak on campus, whether diversity among the faculty or whether it students and their organizations to ensure a variety of different views are heard. as chris indicated it is too important to fail. this is the next generation of leaders we have to make sure they have the tools necessary to go into their lives be on the campus and lead our country forward. >> just before i turn it over to our next panel, this is unfortunately a very compressed time we have for today's discussion. but before we turn it over to the nextan panel, i really would appreciate you talking a little bit from yourr
8:18 pm
perspective as a governor, states to the extent or sing increasingng trend towards polarization, also now in the context of public universities on trustees to say presidents should make sure the trustees understand this commitment and have theirtaha back. can you be confident that those attentions to not get replicated on the board of trustees? there is a risk the trustees failed to transcend their own partisan differences in these moments. do we need to worry about that? >> we should always worried. i have been a trustee a public university university of vermont was ideologically diverse. we had legislators of both parties on the board of trustees ass well.
8:19 pm
that is why it is so difficult and so important. student ant half-century ago and i was often asked what is t different today? i say more technology and better food. but beyond that there is a different climate in terms of free expression. i was the head of the young republicans on the northeastern liberal institution but nobody ever suggested i should not be heard. today people are suggesting some voices not be heard. h so everybody has to understand how important it is. as my friend bernie sanders once asked my controversial speaker came to our campus, go ahead and let them speak. we have to adopt that attitude and recognize the pursuit of knowledge being exposed to a variety of viewpoints, even some that make us feel uncomfortable. i think if we keepp that objective in mind will find a way to get there. >> and i agree with jim.
8:20 pm
view it, having been the one to appoint trustees for our colleges and universities in washington state, they went through a pretty rigorous process with me. i was always insistent it's important at the back ofre your president. your present is not performing replace the president. when you have that president, how the presidentsic back. the only way that they will when it comes to day-to-day operation if there is a relationship between that president and those trustees they are engaged in setting the tone, and culture as the president is a period when the crisis happens it's too late to begin to establish a relationship or a plan. there are some really great examples of ideas because of the report we are presenting today. those are the subject of trustee meetings where they can engage, they can see the
8:21 pm
difficulties associated withh it. at the end of the day it's a very key president not be left standing alone during a crisis. but that he or she has gathered a support system from the president, trustees to that faculty, to the students were possible, to the governor. two legislators into the community trustees are key andan essential component of that community of support that's essential to the success of making sure these presidents can produce the civil discourse and >> leadership that we need in this country. >> thank you both, terrific intervention. now i like to pardon our panel and have three task force members who i am going to introduce to you. first, ten a call as a director of philosophy in the project of liberal democracy at rhodes college is also a
8:22 pm
senior fellow for constitutional studies with the jack miller centers for teaching constitutional principles in history. ralph thurman was a founding member of a bridget usa student led organization that champions and dialogue at his alma mater the university of california barkley. bridget usa overseeing chapters more than 40 campuses. laurie white is the president of the university she has served on the board of directors for the national association of student personnel administers foundation and the association for sustainability in higher education. she's smiling and happyis she's currently residing briefly in baltimore so we understand that. these task force members i'm happy to say are joined by the inaugural vice president and provost for inclusion and diversity at auburn university she is also member the board of directors for the national
8:23 pm
association for diversity in higher education. before we get going, finally a reminder attendees can submit questions for any of our panelists today using the live chat on youtube, facebook,ok twitter, using #. i would like to start though, by asking task force members to say a quick word, how did the task force arrive at his conclusions and tracking the broad theme of this conversation today and the work the task force has done i would be really interested in knowing how after a year of intense deliberation, what was the one issue in which you oufound your views were changed by the intense interaction, the deliberation, the debate you've had over the last year. again, we believe that is
8:24 pm
healthy in terms of bringing people together. so, not sure who wants to start. >> i will be happy to start. >> i was not a member of the presidents club on the task force. but i often fantasize about being president for a day. you know i was once told the best version of a committee's minutes is to simply say the committee mold. i think that is what the task force did for weeks and weeks. we mold which is to say we thought seriously, we thought deeply about problems we were all familiar with. but nobody believed they had a handle on. i would say, what i learned
8:25 pm
most, it is a mistake as we faculty tend to think. the faculty are thehe universit. dennis o'brien wrote a great book a few years ago called all of the essential half-truths about higher education. each chapter was so-and-so at the university, the administration's university, the students, thehe faculty. i heard a lot in hearing what that presidential perspective really is like. earlier this morning, laurie white was saying it has been crucial to her success as a president so far but she had a background in student affairs. we brought differentpe perspectives on what is working and not working on the
8:26 pm
campus. different perspectives on the needs of students which is a particular saying i might have had a blind spot and tend to regard students as animals who are in their classroom and don't really exist. we think about them when they are in class not so much out. i learned a lot about getting a perspective on the other dimension of students. >> daniel you have become more sympathetic to president trump. i heard the rest but that's detailing is going to take. >> i will start by saying it was a real gift to be able to engage in dialogue with so many incredible colleagues who dan mentioned represented different perspectives at the university and the issue of
8:27 pm
freedom of expression. to be able to gather on a regular basis for over a year to talk about this critically important issue as jim and kristine underscore was really wonderful. one of the places we really wrestled and jen talked about this, the real important foundational values of freedom of expression diversity, equity and inclusion. going into the conversation i do not know that everyone thought that was going to be part of a really deep and robust conversation which is how do we create environments that affirm the right of every member of our community to be as i say their full authentic self and be able to debate, to share, to criticize and at the same time have an affirming community were all members of osour community, particular
8:28 pm
those have been historically marginalized do not feel threatened by inviting speakers as kristine just articulated who may not agree or who might even dehumanize how it is they identify themselveshe. i think there were quite a few sessions where we wrestled how do we effectively articulate this in our report? too not undermine either of these values and to be able to reinforce for those who read our report we think they are critically important and theyey are intertwined. >> thoughts? >> excuse me i'm going to hope osmost of my coughing is muted. thank you president daniels for having me. thank you to my colleagues on the task force and those who
8:29 pm
are not here today. i think professor collins said it i would like too amend the world to beat dialogue and deliberation. i think it's beautiful working on this task force as we were directly practicing the skills we are asking all of these to practice themselves. ti did take a while there are certainly times you spent maybe half an hour on one paragraph. i think because of that we put together something that is robust and can help a lot of campuses and help this country. what i learned a lot of was again the constraints on university admin. as a student organizer it's easy to see the administration confining you to make change on campus. i had a real appreciation for the stakeholders and things to
8:30 pm
consider as far as university presents and administration goes when approaching these issues. i know i am lot more sympathetic to rules and stickiness that i thought could easily. [inaudible] her. >> before going onto the next question, to our good minutes tutorial cochairs what was the issue you found yourself beingse challenged on solute change during the course of the committee's deliberation? >> we just heard laurie speak about things i mentioned earlier briefly and that is the importance of ensuring diversity, equity, and inclusion are consistent with the right of free expression. we want everybody to be included ethnically, every
8:31 pm
kind of demographic. but ideologically as well. if we have that attitude, if we agree everyone is important everyone's views need to be heard and valued then we can address these two objectives that some felt initially were in conflict. we believe strongly are not. >> i would agree with both as a learning experience for me in a large part around this issue. what i see happening in our country is the country overall is struggling with this very issue and not doing a good job. i fundamentally believe the answer to how we do a good job in dealing with free expression and diversity, inclusion, equity is really by marrying understanding they coexist. and to make sure theo leadership for how we do that is present on our colleges and
8:32 pm
universities has a role model to the rest of the country that does not seem to be handling it well prefer the generation of tomorrow who is prepared do it and dow, it righ. >> let me go to a question that might be a bit in the weeds it's an important point that's made in the report i'm not sure want to take it on. it's open form as to who is to respond to it. you state in the report there's overwhelming survey research and evidence the intellectual climate on many campuses and constraint us directly in the report. this is in itself a question that's quiteub contested in the public sphere. especially given the overreliance on anecdote and insinuation. can you say a bit more about what evidence you found most compelling for this finding? i'm not sure he wants to take that. just giving that characterization just to get a
8:33 pm
sense of how you got there. you go ahead with. >> i chatted with the university president not represented on her task force. i sit you don't have much yoursity of opinion on faculty he said well that is not our objective. but let me explain how it happens. because new positions when they are open are filled by the existing faculty. it is a perpetuation of the views who are already there. and so i think of one important is we need to have a diversity of views on college faculty into some degree many institutions that is not the case now. that is one factor that certainly affected my thinking. >> i would say the data reinforce would have been my observations over time and
8:34 pm
higher 4 education for the last 40 years. over the course of time, i have noticed moving away from intellectualism on a college campus is driven and a large part by students and parents not looking at a college education as a means to employment and not necessarily as a means to spark one's intellect. also the data reinforce for me, the date it talked about when students want to argue a point it is about their lived experiences. it's how they feel about something. it's not necessarily about the data in the research.ou that compelled us to one of a really important recommendations which is that we have to give students the tools to be able to engage in the debate and intellectual conversation that we want to see happen on our college
8:35 pm
campuses. to imagine we would take young people who have grown up primarily in homogeneous environments, throw them into a college campus setting and expect for them to figure out how they are supposed to to debate difference. i think what is important is we need to be able to think about how we introduce these concepts to our students. then how we give them the actual tools to engage in the intellectual conversation we wouldou like to see happen on our college campuses. >> the thank you. anyone else want to t chime in or should i go to the next question? >> would love to hear from you. >> i think one of the sources i look at freedom of expression. they have been collecting data
8:36 pm
in 202062% of students said they believed campus climate was stopping people from expressing their true feeling that is up 7% from 2019. you can't draw a line or two points but if that's in six years it would have onen 100% of people. [inaudible] it's incredibly concerning student should feel comfortable expressing their beliefs are. i it mentioning to anecdotal who are working on freedom of expression. time after time they say students expressed by mail to come into a space, challenge the different views with different types of people and feel safe with their own
8:37 pm
opinion. those two together really makes a case this is a big problem and not only is it a bigge problem is getting worse year after year. >> that is also influenced by social media. and the data that says one of the reasons students are hesitant to speak up and speak are afraid they're going to be socially ostracized by their peers on social media. faculty are also afraid as well that if they say something controversial or perceived as being controversial someone has their videophone and is going too post that all over social media. that also influences the data at ross just talked about that is concerning to all of us. >> can i build a bit on this discussion? i want to ask you the paradox you described in the report
8:38 pm
are campuses in so many ways over the last several decades have become much more diverse in a number of different directions. we move from all mail campuses to women on campus and increasingly seen waves of religious diversity, racial diversity increasingly more and more institutions are acutely aware of geographic and socioeconomic diversity. there is this a paradox you described, are campuses are more diverse than ever and yet we have the spirit of conformityon that uc is being really important in shape for discourse. and again he put most of this at the feet of social media. how do we understand this paradox?
8:39 pm
>> i suggest this, there is a certain emphasis or inflection maybe of the meaning of inclusion that can become a problem when one loses sight of the question inclusion and what precisely? what i have in mind is an element there is a sense among students that their role is to somehow it represents their identity. being included means representative function. i think what we are aiming at ultimately is joining together equally in an enterprise that transcends identity. your demographic identity does not confer on you any privilegele.
8:40 pm
and i think what we were trying to articulate as a culture of free expression and open inquiry is going to be prohibitive when students think the challenge a fellow student opinion or judgmentt is paramount to disrespecting their identity. so, what i think we are trying to say is the reconciliation of inclusion, and free speech principles rests on this acknowledgment that we have to remind ourselves all the time of what we are doing is including everybody in a common enterprise ofno knowledge speaking in knowledge production. and in that regard, there is a real sense in which you're checking your identity at the door of the classroom. what we want to hear are your judgments.
8:41 pm
they're neither qualified nor disqualified because of the particular identity that you happen to have. >> i am going to ask, a random person whose on the panel for her opinion albeit random but expert is going to be charged with responding to, as we all will be this report and try to think about whether it is actionable and in fact we can thread the needle in terms of a balancing the need for commitment to free expression while simultaneously inclusion values. and so are random expert we are very thankful you're here. could you talk first and foremost what you really see
8:42 pm
asot noteworthy for your campus? then also when it comes down to how to navigate difficult conversations. let's just put an obvious one on the table. think about the days around the appropriateness for this is an issue played out in the halls of congress. it is beingng played out in a court system. and yet how do we, based how do we thread the naval needle that ultimately robust butt nevertheless do not have the effect of undermining the sense of belonging in the conversation. >> two questions. first reaction and then the heart example.
8:43 pm
the reaction to your report which we will talk about, not a member of the task force by havingco participated on free expression convening in 2019 to discuss an article i co-authored about free expression. so, from my perspective looking at the totality and the recommendation the acknowledgment once they reached campuses was reallyy helpful. it was important i think we understand free expression and civil discourse has changed, charge, from the experiences of jens the difference in terms of some cases into an environment with
8:44 pm
less exposure to diverse ways of thinking andur doing. the impact of social media that's already been interested as discussed. and the perceived of free expression which i will speak to a little bit more and a moment. i really do think outlining these realities and exploring them, your confluence was important for understanding leaders. i do think this is a very helpful roadmap. i really liked i like the way on the constituency base is going to be very helpful for leaders to be able to apply and adapt these recommendations the essence of their institutional missions and their culture. i also say i was and it won't
8:45 pm
surprise you, please to see the recommendation the first recommendation about leaders, leading to extend capitol. to support this and also the third recommendation because i don't think the way i see it the principle of free speech and diversity equity and inclusion coexisting and sometimes not even broached and not with clarity and depth. and so i want to quote this if i can into your second question, at a time when they are compatible equity in conclusion freedom of expression is ultimately exclusive source. at the same time university
8:46 pm
leaders must remember their fully included in the campus communities to which they disagree. free expression culture on that respectful learning involvement for all. how we engage our issues on our campus issues like affirmative action arere considered academic institutions cannot face straight ahead. affirmative option. as of the necessary tools to ensure that this kind on our campuses that make our learning environment and in
8:47 pm
many cases make them electric. we can talk about what kind of classroom experiences should be. it is hard for me too separate them out. i understand that people do. this mission minded mission centered as interval to the mission of our institution there are questions coming in that really follow up on the issue between freedom of expression of their others on
8:48 pm
the panel who want to address this recording the reflections of all of the members of the task force and respond to the first question that's been offered in the chapter. with freedom of expression and respectful learning environment we underscore this is not easy work. as it's been said before
8:49 pm
convey so for example on my campus most recently not directed toward individual student but in the bounds of the classroom conversation quoting somebody else who use the n word in describing let me tell you why. i went on to talk about an english major their books i have read that use that word.
8:50 pm
would not want to intervene dormer more that was being used but i also said however, i would not use it i would encourage others to use it. and there may be, however situation in a classroom setting where that word mightas be assigned in a movie et cetera. i think that is an example of the ways in which we can convey there are certain words, phrases, even speakers we do not support. at that we defend the rights of the campus to invite the speaker of the professor to prove particular books and material. and why all that is so important. we have a question then is now come in.
8:51 pm
help shape your recommendation in my experience we like to feel students have to feel that is a welcome thing. and so many of our recommendations are talking about creating a more welcoming campus environment
8:52 pm
things arere not going to be changing for the other thing i would like to quickly harp on as this is a culture issue. you cannot not mandate people appreciate diversity. it's not something is going to work. what happens is this is a process we are looking at for administrators and eventually students who support listening to other people. support free expressions of the campus culture as a whole can be welcoming to the group as well. >> other thoughts for members of the panel? >> i would add something to that. i saw a question in the chat that was addressed to how we go about promoting viewpoint
8:53 pm
diversity in the classroom, the first thing you have to do is build it in to your course. i think more importantly, one has to remind and i think it's something to embrace the viewpoint better, we have to remind ourselves the tendency of individuals andwa community to want to than its existing opinions but it's going to be a knowledge community has got to valued skepticism. it has got to seek out controversy. it has got to invite argument.
8:54 pm
it has got to disrupt that comfort that we all lapse into. that is the value i don't think john stuart mill is the solution to what ails campus culture. there is enduring argument that reminds us of the tendency to lapse into orthodoxy. it isn't difficult to tolerate it cannot be part of the knowledge of producing activity if you are going to immunize yourself or try to shield yourself from suffering
8:55 pm
that kind of provocation. and again you need to seek out the disagreement. that is the only way the knowledge of business amounts too. >> somehow, if somebody has an idea that we vehemently disagree with, we disagree not only with the idea our challenge is also to figure out how we can be an affirming community, a community built on trust have a contentious argument we can leave the room and go out and have a bite to eat with each other wait forever have to stand up for
8:56 pm
us to have a expression on campus i don't think you're evil i think you are mistaken and give it you a reason. separate the reason from the person is a fundamental principle of argument. we have lost the practice of that i think. on campus too often pray. >> we have a question now from john wilson, should college in order to have an i institutional commitment to freedom cracks
8:57 pm
do we need to center? do we need a specific program initiative in order to meet the aspirations that you dictated in your report? >> i'm not sure what we need to center. one of the things are doneon at auburn, we had was march a critical conversation theory with dew point diversity experts are professors we visited or agreed to be part of a pilot he was doing. we have partnered with the academy through our office of diversity.
8:58 pm
andff really affect mutual understanding. we have logged 250 students who have gone through that experience. it has been i think an impact point on campus. it's taking advantage of the tools that are available and engaging them on campus. >> we are almost at an end. i do want to return back to the two and i am incredibly sympathetic to the argument you are making and very thoughtfully set out in the report. is there any part of you that worries some reaction might be yes we've heard the arguments. but we are not persuaded. that is to say, i think for a lot of us the concern here is we have not done a good job of
8:59 pm
it making the argument for free speech. and the important foundational role it plays in democracy pretty think i can well imagine will be some people even after they hear the argument of a free from insult they will say that's absolutist when it comes to first amendment protection. expression, i'm not buying the argument i'm on a sober note but it's an important question to ask. >> first of all anyone who has that point of view i continue to respect them would be happy to go out have a bite to eat. we have a specific skills
9:00 pm
deficit in this country. we have got to find a solution. if it's not this then what? otherwise were going to continue to have disruption, the kind of polarization we had one episode on our campus onenj professor the shutting down of a speaker to elevate the skills of citizenship we agree on the goaloa we could figure out more at society and civil discourse to seek knowledge in the community that respects everyone's point of view. : you know, democracy is kind of
9:01 pm
difficult, to say the least. freedom of expression, i happen to be a lawyer, and freedom of expression has been an issue for the u.s. supreme court on how many different occasions? it is still evolving and growing. it is still maturing, and, now, it is really being challenged by diversity, equity, and inclusion, and rather than say to someone, disagree and i'm done with you. that's not the answer and continue to include that individual and grow and mature and understand fundamentally democracy while challenging freedom of expression is that foundation and if as a country we want a better tomorrow then it lies fundamentally and there
9:02 pm
we can create that leadership and can disagree without being disagreeable. that to me is the future and why i'm so appreciative. this is the first day for civic responsibility in thisrs country and i hope the college and universities all across the country will see their charging leadership and responsibility to make sure we achieve democracy better tomorrow than it is today. >> thank you so much. over to you.
9:03 pm
>> thank you to the audience for joining us at the partisan and sharing the report and a findings including sessions at the policy conference and at the college chapters across the country and mitigations who served in the elected office and the interim president, the former governor.
9:04 pm
writing to us the e-mail address and at the period of expression. all of this is a bipartisan policy center for the very best for the upcoming 22 semester. it's been a very challenging and we wish you the best. thanks very much again to the audience and all of you for joining us today. thank you and good day.
9:05 pm
a hearing on federal funding for historically black colleges and universities known as hbcus. we will hear about the news regarding infrastructure, financial aid and facilities. the congresswoman of florida chaired the hearing. the subcommittee on higher


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on