Tuesday, at the College of William and Mary in Virginia, members of the campus’ Black Lives Matter group decided to protest a dialogue about free speech on college campuses. We’ve seen this kind of thing happen a lot with conservative speakers who attempt to talk on the matter of free speech, but this scenario is different.
A surprising enemy to Black Lives Matter
The speaker at hand was Claire Gastañaga, the executive director of Virginia’s branch of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). If you are unfamiliar with the ACLU, they are an organization that is highly liberal in their ideologies. They advocate quite a bit for BLM, abortion rights, and immigrants. So it was surprising to say the least to see the BLM group taking on ACLU, challenging their ideas of free speech on campus.
When Gastañaga began to speak, she was immediately joined on stage and in front of the stage by the group holding up signs. At first, Gastañaga welcomed the group, saying that they were a great example of what she was going to talk about. “I’m going to talk to you about knowing your rights, and protests and demonstrations, which this illustrates very well. Then I’m going to respond to questions from the moderators, and then questions from the audience,” stated Gastañaga.
Only, that was the last thing that Gastañaga could get out. The BLM group started chanting things like, “ACLU, you protect Hitler too,’ and “the oppressed are not impressed.” Some were holding signs of protest, written on the largest of them was the phrase “blood on your hands.” The most shocking statement that the group was yelling and chanting was “liberalism is white supremacy.” This is actually quite baffling, since BLM and other organizations of the like, including the ACLU, are indeed of liberal ideologies.
Liberalism is white supremacy?
The group was apparently angry with the ACLU, following the events in Charlottesville, which was their reasoning for the protest. The ACLU, being the experts of the first amendment that they are, had to oblige with the fact that those protesting confederate statues being removed were protected under the first amendment, just as those who came to oppose them that day.
The group actually took to facebook and went live with their protest on the Black Lives Matter W&M facebook page. Surprisingly enough, the group faced quite a bit of backlash from other facebook users who couldn’t understand either why the group was protesting against an organization that shares their aims.
Following the event, the College of William & Mary released this statement:
William & Mary has a powerful commitment to the free play of ideas. We have a campus where respectful dialogue, especially in disagreement, is encouraged so that we can listen and learn from views that differ from our own, so that we can freely express our own views, and so that debate can occur. Unfortunately, that type of exchange was unable to take place Wednesday night when an event to discuss a very important matter – the meaning of the First Amendment — could not be held as planned.
Silencing certain voices in order to advance the cause of others is not acceptable in our community. This stifles debate and prevents those who’ve come to hear a speaker, our students in particular, from asking questions, often hard questions, and from engaging in debate where the strength of ideas, not the power of shouting, is the currency. William & Mary must be a campus that welcomes difficult conversations, honest debate and civil dialogue. (via reason.com)
Free speech belongs only to them
It appears that this group has decided that they only want free speech to apply to them. Because the ACLU is a protector of the first amendment, which they do recognize includes the ‘alt-right,’ this Black Lives Matter group is no longer interested in what the ACLU has done and can do for them.
Who will be the next target of ant-free speech? Where does the nonsensical malarkey end? I can assimilate with BLM, I agree that police brutality is wrong, I understand that it is a huge problem in the United States right now. But what I don’t understand is why they are arguing and preventing an organization that is on their side from being able to speak.
Who do you think will be the next target for anti-free speech? Let us know in the comments below!