Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Culture

Howard Dean Is Glad That Yale Prof Is Done Teaching, Because 'Respecting Others' Trumps 'Free Speech'

Erika Christakis was respecting her students when she told them the truth.

Robby Soave | 12.7.2015 12:20 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
Large image on homepages | CNN
(CNN)
Howard Dean
CNN

Howard Dean, the former Vermont governor and 2004 Democratic presidential candidate, is quite satisfied that Erika Christakis—the Yale University professor who mildly defended offensive Halloween costumes—has decided to quit teaching. On Twitter, he wrote:

Yale faculty member at center of protests will leave teaching role https://t.co/vums1UlRAl Free speech is good. Respecting others is better

— Howard Dean (@GovHowardDean) December 5, 2015

Christakis explained her decision to quit in a statement to The Washington Post:

 "I have great respect and affection for my students, but I worry that the current climate at Yale is not, in my view, conducive to the civil dialogue and open inquiry required to solve our urgent societal problems," she said in an email to The Washington Post.

And Dean thinks that's a good thing?

Look, "respecting others" is a perfectly noble goal, but it's entirely subjective. I would argue that Christakis was showing respect for her students when she opined that perhaps they were mature enough to make their own judgments about Halloween costumes without administrative guidance. There's nothing respectful about the regime of emotional coddling and feelings-protection some students want administrators to create on their campuses; infantilization is not dignifying.

When "respecting others" is a higher priority than defending free speech on campus, administrators are given license to punish students and faculty for the stupidest things. They also wall themselves off from legitimate criticism. People with institutional power—like campus administrators—simply have the most to gain from restricting speech rights. Is that what Dean wants: more coercive power for the powerful? 

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: New Jersey's Roads Don't Just Suck: They're Massively Expensive, Too

Robby Soave is a senior editor at Reason.

CultureCampus Free SpeechFree Speech
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (123)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. Fist of Etiquette   9 years ago

    Goddammit, Soave. Why am I not seeing that picture of Howard Dean strangling a kitten accompanying this article? Yeeeeaaahhhhhhhhhhhhh!

  2. Hugh Akston   9 years ago

    Is that what Dean wants: more coercive power for the powerful?

    Howard Dean, the former Vermont governor and 2004 Democratic presidential candidate...

    1. Fist of Etiquette   9 years ago

      How could any dean be so mean?

      1. Episiarch   9 years ago

        He's always dean that.

        1. Hugh Akston   9 years ago

          I should be ashamed that I keep missing all these Glee references.

          1. Episiarch   9 years ago

            Yes, Hugh. You should be.

  3. Free Market Socialist $park?   9 years ago

    That was a rhetorical question at the end, right?

  4. Mookman   9 years ago

    This guy again? I thought he is only still relevant during bar trivia games when team members frantically try to remember which pol humiliated himself the most ten years ago.

  5. Free Market Socialist $park?   9 years ago

    You know, this whole thing isn't really about power. It's just about making sure everyone believes the same right things. I'd be willing to bet that greater than 85% of these people don't see getting everyone on the same ideological boat as coercive power. It's why the fall back position is to have someone else (the government) enforce their rules. They don't want the power themselves because they know they're too weak to handle it.

    1. Free Market Socialist $park?   9 years ago

      Please note that the above is pure speculation. It sprung fully formed from my brain and was not influenced by some magazine/newspaper (I don't read) nor some talk radio show (I don't listen).

      1. Scarecrow & WoodChipper Repair   9 years ago

        I have always figured that control freaks are projecting their own weak self-discipline and lack of self-control, and thus want guardians for all.

        I define self-control as "the absolute right and duty to control self and property, regardless of harm to self or distaste to others", and one of the obvious derivations is that if you won't exercise your duty to control yourself or you violate others' right to self-control, then you don't get to exercise your right to self-control either.

        Control freaks want to assign government as everybody's guardian, with them at the helm. They have removed all doubt.

        1. Free Market Socialist $park?   9 years ago

          I'm not buying that they're control freaks. I'd say they are controlled freaks. They're lazy sycophants, hangers on, yes men. They want somebody else in power that they can fawn over. They just expect that those in charge will be enforcing views that they approve of. They are too spineless to take control themselves. They're toadies.

          1. Scarecrow & WoodChipper Repair   9 years ago

            Maybe some are. My experience is that those screaming loudest for gun control, for instance, seem to think that the mere handling of a gun puts the thought of killing in mind, never mind studies showing CCW holders are less likely to commit crimes than off-duty police. Same applies to alcohol -- the temperance union mottoes seemed to be that anyone drinking demon rum was turned into a crazed blood-thirsty womanizer, that no one could drink in moderation or even enjoy drinking. Same applies to so many drug warriors today, that no recreational drug has any purpose, that no one can enjoy them, that any one who uses drugs turns into a face-eating cannibal.

            I agree with your general statement that they expect those in power to only enforce the right laws, but I think it's more than being a toady, that it stems from being afraid of their own emotions and they project that sense of helplessness onto everybody else.

  6. John C. Randolph   9 years ago

    Good thing I didn't have any respect to lose for Howard Dean.

    -jcr

  7. Citizen X   9 years ago

    YEEEEEEEEAAAAAAH!

  8. sarcasmic   9 years ago

    Yeeeeaaahh!

    1. RBS   9 years ago

      I remember the incident but I don't really remember why it was considered such a terrible thing?

      1. JD the elder   9 years ago

        You have to remember that politics is basically High School writ large. Remember that kid who stepped in dog poop by accident once, and no one ever let him forget it? Dean made himself look kind of silly, and nobody ever let him forget it. Our President has to be the coolest kid around.

        1. Steve G   9 years ago

          And yet Trump is still firmly in the running...

        2. Zeb   9 years ago

          I never got why people did dumb shit like that in high school either.

      2. sarcasmic   9 years ago

        I don't remember anyone saying it was "terrible." Just embarrassing. Terribly embarrassing.

        1. Zeb   9 years ago

          I just don't see that either. He was giving a speech at a political rally. Isn't shouting and carrying on and trying to rile up the crowd kind of the point?

          1. Mongo   9 years ago

            The Top Men determined that John Kerry was to be the Democratic nominee for the presidential race. They had to gin up an excuse to knock out Dean.

            My Dem colleagues were split between the two and the Dean camp fell into line.

            There was nothing wrong or inappropriate about his scream.

            1. sarcasmic   9 years ago

              There was nothing wrong or inappropriate about his scream.

              I don't remember anyone saying it was. What is was was funny. And when taken out of context and repeated over and over, it became a subject of ridicule. Was that fair? Probably not. But that doesn't really matter, does it. Principals trump principles.

            2. Suicidy   9 years ago

              Split between those two stiffs...........Talk about setting the bar low.

      3. Zeb   9 years ago

        Nor do I. In fact I find it utterly mystifying. I have no idea why that was seen as any kind of gaffe or mistake or that it said anything negative about Dean at all.

        That said, fuck Howard Dean.

        Free speech is good. Respecting others is also good. But there is no basis on which to compare those two. And free speech is a fundamental legal and cultural principle in a way that respecting others (especially when it comes to stupid bullshit like people getting offended by Halloween costumes) just isn't.

        1. SugarFree   9 years ago

          Dean was always dancing on the edge of spit-flecked madness in the eyes of the electorate and this pushed him over. His sweat-faced enthusiasm for the job was always vaguely distasteful to most people.

          1. Bill Dalasio   9 years ago

            I think you nailed it here. For just about anyone else, it wouldn't have been a gaffe. But, Dean had, at least to some extent, cultivated the image of a loose cannon. And The Scream solidified that image in a lot of voters' minds.

          2. Zeb   9 years ago

            He was in the wrong party 12 years too soon, I guess. (Holy shit, 2004 is 12 years ago, almost.)

  9. Crusty Juggler   9 years ago

    He doesn't respect her, though?

    1. sarcasmic   9 years ago

      C'mon. Who could respect a woman who dresses like that?

    2. Just say Nikki   9 years ago

      He respects her now.

  10. Pl?ya Manhattan.   9 years ago

    Suthenboy dropped a great line yesterday:
    Put your feelings in one hand and shit in the other, and tell me which one weighs more.

    There is no adult supervision at universities anymore.

    1. JW   9 years ago

      Looks like it's missing at the Federal level as well.

    2. Ms. Eleanor Lavish   9 years ago

      So you're saying we all need to shit in our hands and fling it at the nearest college student?

      1. Pl?ya Manhattan.   9 years ago

        Almost certainly a hate crime, so yes.

    3. Loki   9 years ago

      There is no adult supervision at universities anymore.

      Technically there shouldn't need to be. Used to be that college students were adults, and most of them behaved accordingly. They certainly didn't demand adult supervision when it came to choosing Halloween costumes. These college students are emotionally and psychologically stunted children.

      1. Suicidy   9 years ago

        When I see these punk kids, I'm reminded of the lyrics to "Holiday in Cambodia".

        1. Neon Bible   9 years ago

          +1 Star-Bellied Sneech

  11. Juvenile Bluster   9 years ago

    Is that what Dean wants: more coercive power for the powerful?

    Rhetorical question, I assume.

    1. Mickey Rat   9 years ago

      "Say it ain't so, Howard, say it ain't so!"

  12. Troy muy grande boner   9 years ago

    Who the fuck is Howard Dean and why should I give a fuck about what he has to say about anything?

    1. Dark Lord of the cis   9 years ago

      1. He was the comic relief a few elections ago.

      2. Because making an ass out of yourself on live TV is the mark of TOP MEN.

      1. R C Dean   9 years ago

        + 1 VP

    2. wFt   9 years ago

      That statement can apply to just about any pundit, politician, self-appointed advocate, or guy on the street.

      At least as far as I am concerned.

  13. B.P.   9 years ago

    I want to respect other people, but a lot of them don't seem worthy of it.

    1. Suicidy   9 years ago

      If they can't lift Mjolnir, then they can fuck off.

  14. Lee G   9 years ago

    Free speech is good. ______ is better

    Fill in the blank contest

    My entry: "Sucking authoritarian cock"

    1. Just say Nikki   9 years ago

      Heroin.

    2. Ms. Eleanor Lavish   9 years ago

      "mimosas with Dom Perignon and grapefruit juice?"

      1. Pl?ya Manhattan.   9 years ago

        Blocked.

    3. Crusty Juggler   9 years ago

      Power

    4. PBR Streetgang   9 years ago

      Gelfling essence?

    5. Dark Lord of the cis   9 years ago

      Free beer?

    6. commodious spittoon   9 years ago

      Pummeling hypersensitive dweebs.

    7. Just say Nikki   9 years ago

      Ativan.

      1. Episiarch   9 years ago

        You really should have combined your two answers.

        1. Just say Nikki   9 years ago

          Um that sounds like a waste of downers, dude.

          1. Hugh Akston   9 years ago

            CS Lewis is pretty depressing

            1. Ms. Eleanor Lavish   9 years ago

              Mr. Tumnus disagrees.

    8. sarcasmic   9 years ago

      Firepower?

    9. Free Market Socialist $park?   9 years ago

      A high attack bonus

    10. wFt   9 years ago

      sex/money/power

    11. B.P.   9 years ago

      Avoiding having your life ruined by a cabal of sensitive students back by another cabal of vice provosts?

    12. Princess Trigger   9 years ago

      Hitler?

    13. Free Market Socialist $park?   9 years ago

      A six demon bag

    14. Sevo   9 years ago

      Hitler. The answer is always Hitler.

  15. Ms. Eleanor Lavish   9 years ago

    Free speech is good but respecting others is better?

    But only one of those things is a constitutional amendment.

  16. Scarecrow & WoodChipper Repair   9 years ago

    Assuming others are adults and don't need to be coddled is far more respectful than insulating them from reality as if they were infants.

    1. R C Dean   9 years ago

      We have a winner.

    2. Suicidy   9 years ago

      Those kids aren't going to get better. Better to smother them in their cribs.

  17. Toast88   9 years ago

    What this is all really about is that no one cares about their rights.

    People don't care that their rights can be taken away without due process. They don't care about free speech. They don't care that you can randomly be put on the no-fly list and therefore have your second amendment RIGHTS taken without due process.

    These people have not grown up cherishing their rights. When you talk with them about rights, they think you're a raving loon who loves shootings and hates everyone.

    1. Free Market Socialist $park?   9 years ago

      That's because there is a distressing number of people who believe that they get their rights from the government.

      1. sarcasmic   9 years ago

        Where else could they come from? God? Humanity? Nature? Come on. Rights are meaningless if they cannot be enforced, and government is the only way to truly enforce anything. So your rights are whatever the government says they are. Nothing more, nothing less. You see, it is impossible for government to violate your rights because they define your rights. If they say you don't have a right to live, and then kill you, nothing else will happen. Thus government is God. Now let us pray.

        Our Obama, who lives in Washington, hallowed by thy name....

        /Tony (if he was honest)

      2. John   9 years ago

        Your rights come from the end of a barrel of a gun. If you don't have the ability and will to kill for your rights or are lucky enough to have someone else who will, be prepared to die or surrender your rights because rest assured someone out there has the ability and the will to kill you to take them.

        It sucks but it is how the world works.

        1. Free Market Socialist $park?   9 years ago

          Your rights don't come from a gun, they are a integral part of your being. I'll agree that they don't mean much unless you're willing to fight for them.

          The government doesn't assign rights, it defends them. The government can't take away your rights, it can only suppress your ability to express them.

          1. John   9 years ago

            You are right. the government doesn't assign you anything. At best it enforces or protects your rights. At worst, it takes them from you.

            It is really a question of semantics. Does your need to be able to kill to keep them if necessary mean they come from the barrel of a gun? Technically no but practically yes.

    2. wFt   9 years ago

      Just the thing our 10th grade civics teachers warned us about; an uneducated, disengaged electorate being the greatest danger to a democracy. Well, here we are.

      1. Cytotoxic   9 years ago

        Even worse is an uneducated engaged electorate. That gets you Obama and Trump.

        1. John   9 years ago

          The solution is to import millions of uneducated or educated but crazy people from backwards fucked up country. That will improve things.

          1. Suicidy   9 years ago

            Yep. Open borders is awesome that way. And clearly, using taxpayer money to pay their way here is somehow libertarian.

    3. Bill Dalasio   9 years ago

      What this is all really about is that no one cares about their rights.

      No. I suspect they care quite a bit about their rights. It's just that they think that the other fellow's rights can be violated and theirs' will be just fine. They have no problem violating the right to free speech of "icky" people. They just delude themselves that they're never going to be the ones deemed "icky". They have no problem throwing away the Second Amendment rights of "gun nuts". They just never consider the possibility that their free speech rights might some day be the thing deemed inconvenient.

  18. Je suis Woodchipper   9 years ago

    he is a dumbass and not worth writing about.

  19. wFt   9 years ago

    That would be part of the progressive mantra; it's just how they "feel" about it.

  20. Ms. Eleanor Lavish   9 years ago

    OT: Thanks Obama!

    Following President Obama's speech last night, Smith & Wesson is up 7.75% today (its best day in 4 months) and Sturm Ruger is up 8.25% today (most in 8 months)...

    1. sarcasmic   9 years ago

      He is the best gun salesman. Ever.

    2. Rufus The Monocled Derp Slayer   9 years ago

      Mr. President: Gun sales skyrocketed after your speech.

      President (eating pudding. Licks spoon): This was not the unintended consequences I was looking for!

      1. Pro Libertate   9 years ago

        I just had a vision of what Obama is going to do next. A reboot of Fat Albert. He'll do all the voices and the live-action explanations of the morality play of the week.

        1. John   9 years ago

          Think "Life of Julia" with a more diverse cast.

          1. Pro Libertate   9 years ago

            Instead of Russell (based on Cosby's brother), they could create a new character, Malik.

            1. John   9 years ago

              And Trayvon. There needs to be a Trayvon.

            2. Suicidy   9 years ago

              Also a young Muslim radical named Sayeed. Who can teach the gang many lessons of tolerance, while being himself intolerant.

              1. Pro Libertate   9 years ago

                I was actually thinking of Obama's half-brother.

                1. John   9 years ago

                  Malik seems like a lot smarter and nicer than his brother. Seriously.

                  1. Pro Libertate   9 years ago

                    That may be true of Russell Cosby, too, sadly.

                  2. Rufus The Monocled Derp Slayer   9 years ago

                    You need a character acting as Obama's fragile ego.

                    1. Pro Libertate   9 years ago

                      Rudy?

    3. Pl?ya Manhattan.   9 years ago

      I had a strangle on SWHC last week/this week. I've already legged out on the call side, and now it's time to wait....

    4. Drake   9 years ago

      As soon as my credit card closes for the month, grafs.com is going to be getting some business.

  21. The Grinch   9 years ago

    Howard Dean is a motherfucking piece-of-shit asshole and that is being respectful. Don't get started on what I really think about the guy.

  22. Rufus The Monocled Derp Slayer   9 years ago

    Hey. Howard. S-s-suck m-m-my dick.

    Respect enough for you?

    1. geo1113   9 years ago

      You didn't say please!

  23. Sevens   9 years ago

    Seems to be a remarkable woman.

  24. Diane Reynolds (Paul.)   9 years ago

    Well, I guess America will now have to look to Republicans to protect their first amendment rights.

    1. Ms. Eleanor Lavish   9 years ago

      *cries silently into handkerchief*

      1. John   9 years ago

        The Dems will let you keep your porn, provided it is sufficiently gay affirming. There is that.

    2. John   9 years ago

      We are one liberal justice away from both Heller and Citizens' United being overturned.

      1. Suicidy   9 years ago

        Yep. The revolution is that much closer.

  25. John   9 years ago

    Jesus Christ can you live up to the stereotype of the crazy Muslim killer any better? Look at the angry butt hurt look on that woman's face. Ten to one she was the driving force behind it more than him.

    http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/220726/

    1. Rufus The Monocled Derp Slayer   9 years ago

      Are you suggesting there's a cuckold porn video of them out there?

      1. John   9 years ago

        He just looks stupid and a bit out there. She looks like a scary fucking lunatic.

        1. Rhywun   9 years ago

          To be fair, I'm not much to look at after a 12 hour flight either.

          1. John   9 years ago

            Sorry but these assholes are the last people I am going to be fair with. More importantly, no amount of flight creates that kind of scary looking crazy unless it is already there.

          2. Rufus The Monocled Derp Slayer   9 years ago

            Really? I always look good.

          3. R C Dean   9 years ago

            I'm with Rhywun. After a long flight, I look like I'm on a hair-trigger for a homicidal rampage.

            Because I am.

            1. Suicidy   9 years ago

              I have long wished to transform into a giant green rage monster when dealing with the airport.

  26. SugarFree   9 years ago

    What this woman said was said so careful and delivered with no insult intended, but it let in just enough light for the SJWs it see the crack and they jammed the crowbar right in.

    She didn't endorse racist costumes. She didn't. But that's how the little outrage addicts could spin it to the craven media. No analysis of this issue was done whatsoever.

    This is the chilling effect in action. People being too scared to say anything against them is the goal.

    1. John   9 years ago

      Outrage addicts is a good way to describe them. It doesn't matter what she said. The entire point is to be outraged. Since anyone who would ever dream of saying something even remotely racist has long since been run off campus, they are left to police increasingly absurd "violations".

  27. LoneWaco   9 years ago

    he is who I thought he was

    1. John   9 years ago

      When you consider the army of little fascists known as the juicebox mafia got their start supporting him in 2004, that should not come as any surprise.

  28. Free Society   9 years ago

    Look, "respecting others" is a perfectly noble goal

    When you assume that others are automatically deserving of respect.

  29. Loki   9 years ago

    Is that what Dean wants: more coercive power for the powerful?

    Yes.

  30. Roger the Shrubber   9 years ago

    "I have great respect and affection for my students, but I worry that the current climate at Yale is not, in my view, conducive to the civil dialogue and open inquiry required to solve our urgent societal problems," she said in an email to The Washington Post.

    Her resignation is exactly what ISIS the outrage mob wanted her to do!

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

Trump Wants $25 Million To Settle His Meritless 60 Minutes Lawsuit

Joe Lancaster | 5.30.2025 1:45 PM

Two Courts Have Ruled Against Trump's Tariffs—but Not for the Same Reasons

Jack Nicastro | 5.30.2025 1:30 PM

Civil Rights Groups Say Immigrants Are Being Denied Legal Access at Detention Centers

C.J. Ciaramella | 5.30.2025 1:16 PM

Congress Must Vote on Tariffs

Eric Boehm | 5.30.2025 12:10 PM

What J.D. Vance Gets Wrong About Judicial Deference to Executive Power

Damon Root | 5.30.2025 11:42 AM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!