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

Free Speech

Middlebury College Disinvites Polish Politician Ryszard Legutko, Fails Free Speech Test Yet Again

Protesters said it was "absolutely, unequivocally" not their intention to shut down Legutko. The administration panicked anyway.

Robby Soave | 4.18.2019 5:20 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
Legutko | Beata Zawrzel/ZUMA Press/Newscom
(Beata Zawrzel/ZUMA Press/Newscom)

Two years after a mob of activists silenced Charles Murray and attacked his debate partner, Allison Stanger, Middlebury College is again permitting censorship to rule the day. But this time, it is the administration, rather than the students, shutting down the debate.

Earlier this week, Middlebury officials cancelled a planned event featuring Ryszard Legutko, a Polish politician and philosopher. Ryszard is known for his conservative social views, and has criticized "homosexuals, Africans, and feminists." This led many on campus to criticize the Alexander Hamilton Forum, a group associated with the college's political science department that seeks to create stimulating discussions on campus, for inviting him.

"By giving Mr. Legutko a platform to promote his book, you legitimize the destructive party and government that he is associated with," wrote Thomas Gawell, a recent graduate, in an op-ed for The Middlebury Campus, the student paper. "As a Middlebury alumnus from Poland, I am truly hurt that you showed such level of insensitivity and ignorance. I am all for Middlebury inviting speakers that hold views different than those of the campus majority. But you could at least seek speakers who are not bigots and hypocrites."

Legutko was slated to discuss his views on democracy, not his views on homosexuality. Even so, student-activists had planned to protest the talk and were organizing an LGBT-affirming event to take place outside the forum. Importantly, as the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education's Nico Perrino notes, the activists had no intention of shutting down Legutko. On a Facebook page for protest organizers, an activist leader said, "It is absolutely, unequivocally not the intent of this protest and those participating in this protest to prevent Legutko from speaking. Disruptive behavior of this nature will not be tolerated."

This makes the college's decision to cancel the talk very troubling indeed. No doubt the administration did not want a repeat of the Murray debacle. But preemptively shutting down difficult conversations out of an abundance of caution is really no different from shutting them down due to mob pressure. The administration claimed that its decision "was based on an assessment of our ability to respond effectively to potential security and safety risks for both the lecture and the event students had planned in response." This sounds like excuse-making.

Per one student's request, a political science professor, Matthew Dickinson, invited Legutko to address his class instead. This is better than nothing, but did not and could not have included everyone who wished to attend the Hamilton Forum event.

A college that values the free exchange of ideas should be able to host a controversial or provocative speaker—and supporters and critics alike should be able to show up, ask tough questions, or protest in a manner that does not infringe on the rights of anyone else. That Middlebury has once again failed this test is not an encouraging sign.

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: If Either Party Cared About Limiting Executive Power, Trump's Presidency Would Be Toast

Robby Soave is a senior editor at Reason.

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

Show Comments (52)

Latest

Trump's Tariffs and Immigration Policies Destroy Thousands of Acres of Tomato Crops in Florida

Autumn Billings | 5.12.2025 5:14 PM

Defenders of Trump's Birthright Citizenship Order Offer an Implausible Take on a 127-Year-Old Precedent

Jacob Sullum | 5.12.2025 4:52 PM

Why DOGE Failed

Eric Boehm | 5.12.2025 3:20 PM

The Indian-Pakistani Ceasefire Is What U.S. Diplomacy Should Look Like

Matthew Petti | 5.12.2025 12:11 PM

Republicans Want To Redefine Obscenity

Elizabeth Nolan Brown | 5.12.2025 11:45 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!