¹ū¶³“«Ć½app¹Ł·½

Table of Contents

Nicholas Christakis in ā€˜The New York Timesā€™: ā€˜Teaching Inclusion in a Divided Worldā€™

In , Yale University professor Nicholas Christakis adds a post-mortem to last fallā€™s controversy that put him and his wife Erika Christakisā€”then also a faculty member at Yaleā€”at the center of a national conversation over the role that free speech plays at colleges and universities.

The piece, ā€œ,ā€ provides both recognition and encouragement to historically marginalized students who say some of Americaā€™s most cherished valuesā€”like free expressionā€”have not been afforded to them. Nicholas Christakis said he struggled earlier this year with a Native American studentā€™s question about embracing a system that has so often betrayed her people:

Why should she put any faith in institutions in our societyā€”including our judicial system and universitiesā€”when those institutions had clearly betrayed her people in generations past?

ā€œThe same Constitution with its protection of the rights to free expression and assembly that you revere,ā€ she said, ā€œwas previously of no use to people like me.ā€

He said finding the answer to that question was ā€œ[o]ne of the most difficult intellectual and emotional challenges I faced,ā€ but he ultimately concluded: ā€œI wish I had told her ā€¦ that her generation could make those [Enlightenment] values more true, not less. These institutions could be hers, and I believe she should want them to be hers.ā€

Nicholas Christakis says students must understand that their demands for inclusion are predicated on First Amendment values like free speech and freedom of assembly. He warns against the ā€œilliberal (even if permissible)ā€ impulse ā€œto use these traditions to demand the censorship of others, to besmirch fellow students rather than refute the ideas that they express and to treat ideological claims as if they were perforce facts.ā€

He also issues a call to action for faculty:

[T]he faculty must cut at the root of a set of ideas that are wholly illiberal. Disagreement is not oppression. Argument is not assault. Wordsā€”even provocative or repugnant onesā€”are not violence. The answer to speech we do not like is more speech.

You can read Nicholas Christakisā€™ full piece over at .

Recent Articles

FIREā€™s award-winning Newsdesk covers the free speech news you need to stay informed.

Share