|
Good morning!
With a number of world events that are deeply contentious on college campuses, political speech has been in the spotlight. The Daily Princetonian analyzed a variety of political controversies at Princeton, both past and current, with an eye toward how the University community has responded to diverse perspectives. Spanning the University’s pro-war stance during World War I to conflicting ideas about the legality and morality of abortion from ‘Prince’ opinion columnists, this analysis closely scrutinizes some of the most contentious ideas on campus.
Political speech often intersects with the bounds of free speech. In the pages of the ‘Prince,’ the topic of free speech is one that regularly makes the rounds. For instance, opinion columnist Eleanor Clemans-Cope ’26 has argued that the proverbial “wokeness” panic and ostensible progressive “intolerance” at Princeton is supported by statistics that exclude important nuances and context.
On the other hand, Matthew Wilson ’24, a communications fellow with Princetonians for Free Speech, and Alba Bajri ’25, the president of the Princeton Federalist Society’s student chapter, adopt an entirely different stance. Wilson and Bajri write that self-censorship and ideological conformity are pervasive phenomena among the student population, with “frequent breaches of institutional neutrality by ideology-driven administrators, weaponized ‘no communication’ orders and ‘bias-reporting’ systems that encourage speech-policing.”
If recent campus controversies are any indication, free speech debates will continue to represent an major feature of life both at Princeton and other colleges for the foreseeable future.
READ THE FULL STORY →
Analysis by Amy Ciceu
|
