I used to think shouting down a speaker was a valid protest, but a talk at my school changed my mind.

Last semester, a professor from another state was invited to give a talk on immigration policy. His views are pretty conservative, and a big group of students planned to protest by blocking the doors and chanting to shut it down. I was totally on board with that plan. But then, my history professor, Dr. Chen, said something in class that stuck with me. She asked, 'How do you know you're right if you never hear the other side?' That made me pause. I decided to go to the talk instead of the protest. It was tense, and I disagreed with a lot of what he said, but I also heard his actual arguments, not just the sound bites. I even asked a question during the Q&A. It didn't change my views, but it made my disagreement smarter. Now I think letting the talk happen and then challenging the ideas is stronger. Has anyone else gone from wanting to cancel a talk to wanting to debate it instead?

3 comments

3 Comments

nguyen.morgan5d ago

Wow, good for you. That's a huge shift to make. I totally get the impulse to shut down stuff you think is harmful (like, why give a platform to bad ideas, right?). But you nailed it, hearing the actual arguments lets you fight them better. It's like, if you only know the caricature of their point, your counter-arguments are weak. Now you can actually point out the flaws in their logic for real. Smart move.

king.val5d ago

My old neighborhood had a community garden debate that got nasty. People were yelling about "outsiders" ruining it without ever reading the actual proposal. Once a few of us forced a meeting to go line by line, the whole argument fell apart because their fears were based on wrong info. It's the same thing, you have to know the real details to win.

the_terry5d ago

Yeah, forcing that line by line meeting was smart. How do you even get people to sit down and read the thing when they're already mad?