Kind: captions
Language: en
it is the most important right that
Americans have
it's not a coincidence
or an accident that it's named in the
First Amendment
to the Constitution
without it no Democratic Society can be
Democratic for long
and I'm an absolutist
that is um I believe that for example
people say to me
but what about hate speech
well hate speech is much more important
than love speech and the reason is I'm
much more interested in knowing whom I
should not turn my back on
then I am interested in
figuring out who loves me
the following is a conversation with
Harvey silverglade a legendary free
speech Advocate co-founder of fire the
foundation for individual rights and
expression and the author of several
books on the freedom of speech and
criminal justice including the shadow
University the Betrayal of Liberty on
America's campuses
Harvey is running to be on the Harvard
Board of overseers this year with the
writing campaign so you have to spell
his name correctly civil glat
promising to advocate for free speech
and to push for reducing the size of
Harvard's Administration bureaucracy
election is over this Tuesday May 16th
at 5 PM Eastern
to vote you have to be Harvard alumni so
if you happen to be one please vote
online it's a good way to support
freedom of speech on Harvard campus
instructions how to do so are in the
description
as a side note please allow me to say
that since there are several
controversial conversations coming up I
tried to make sure that this podcast is
a platform for free discourse where
ideas are not censored but explored and
if necessary challenged in a thoughtful
and pathetic way is by having such
difficult conversations not by avoiding
them that we can begin to heal divides
and to shed lights on the dark parts of
human history and Human Nature
this is the Lex Friedman podcast to
support it please check out our sponsors
in the description and now dear friends
here's Harvey silverglade
you co-founded the foundation for
individual rights and expression also
known as fire a legendary organization
that fights for the freedom of speech
for all Americans in our courtrooms on
our campuses and in our culture so let's
start with the big question what is
freedom of speech first of all the
organization when I co-founded it in
was called the foundation for individual
rights in education
it focused on
Free Speech issues on college campuses
in Academia
and only earlier this year did we decide
to expand our reach beyond the campuses
which is why the name although the
acronym fire remains it's now the
foundation for individual rights and
expression the e used to be education
the e used to be education it's now
expression and we basically do a lot of
the cases the ACLU used to do the ACLU
now Moore's the the progressive
organization rather than a civil
liberties organization
and um and we've taken the um the the
role of dealing with free speech in in
the society generally in and now this is
a particularly
um
uh an era prone to censorship
um everybody thinks they're right that
people who disagree with them should not
be able to voice their views it's a very
difficult period right now both on
campus and off campus
um it's about as as intolerant an era as
I can remember in I'm going to be 81 May
10th I was born on Mother's Day 1942.
and I can't remember it being this bad I
was born during the McCarthy era
um so that says a lot and um it sort of
reminds me of that
well let's start with that almost a
philosophical question a legal question
a human question what is this Freedom
that you care so much about that you
fought for so much freedom of speech it
is the most important right that
Americans have
it's not a coincidence
or an accident that it's named in the
First Amendment
to the Constitution
without it no Democratic Society can be
Democratic for long
and I'm an absolutist
that is um I believe that for example
people say to me
but what about hate speech
well hate speech is much more important
than love speech and the reason is I'm
much more interested in knowing whom I
should not turn my back on
that I am interested in
figuring out who loves me or who likes
me
so hate speech is the most important in
my view and yet it's uh it's banned in
for example schools it's unbelievable
um kids are not schooled into
understanding the glory of the first
amendment when when schools say to them
they shouldn't say things that are going
to make somebody feel bad
um I mean the purpose of speech is to
express honest
views that people have and um so I
believe hate speech is as important as
love speech and my view is more
important
so it should be brought to the surface
rather than operate in Shadows
absolutely
absolutely what is the connection
between freedom of speech and freedom of
thought
well in a free Society
thoughts start in the brain and then
they come out the mouth
so there are different ends of the same
Spectrum so to you the censorship of
speech eventually leads to a censorship
of thought of course censorship of the
mode by which other people know what
you're thinking
so there's some aspect of our society
that is uh the thinking is done
collectively and without being able to
speak to each other we cannot do this
kind of collective ranking and out of
speed the theory is that ultimately out
of speech comes truth that isn't no
necessarily so
but I do think that when there's free
speech better decisions are made because
people put their views on the table in a
Frank accurate way and then those views
mixed together
and clash and out of that usually
comes the better the better decision
not always but usually more more often
than not but if somebody is not allowed
to be a you know sit at the table of
decision making
then the decision-making process is
poorer
um less robust
diverse
and ultimately less successful
so can you elaborate on the idea Free
Speech absolutism
so
hate speech
can be quite painful to quite a large
number of people does this worry you yep
living in a free Society
requires that you expose yourself to
some discomfort you call it pain
it's maybe emotional pain it's not
physical pain
um
but
it's uh it's the price we pay for living
in a free Society every so often we're
insulted
we're emotionally hurt
think of the alternative all the
alternatives are worse nobody ever
promised us a Rose Garden
we're lucky to be in a country that has
the First Amendment it's also the oh
it's the most diverse country in the
world
because of immigration
I mean my my
grandparents My Father's Side came over
from Russia my mother's side came home
from Poland
I'm very happy that my grandparents came
in from Russia I would not want to be in
Russia today I'd probably be sharing a
cell with a Wall Street Journal reporter
um so um I'm thankful that they came in
and um this is a great country it's got
troubles right now but our country
doesn't and we've had it's really had a
civil war we had segregation uh we had
the decimation of the Indians we're not
perfect
but it's the best place in the world for
somebody who values Liberty so you don't
think that hate speech can Empower large
groups
that uh
eventually lead to physical action to
physical harm to others no I don't I
think that
that
um we have developed a culture in which
um it's understood that if you don't
like what you hear you you talk back
um you write you write something
um
we don't punch each other we insult each
other
um it's insulting great well I don't
know it's okay I used to as a kid in
Brooklyn where I was born I was born and
raised in Bensonhurst
we used to say Sticks and Stones can
break by bones but names can never harm
me and it's absolutely true if what was
true when I was five is true and I'm I'm
almost 81.
so I've lived a long time I've seen it
all
and I'm talking from experience as well
as Theory
it's what happens when you reach your
80s
I read that you had this line that you
cannot be protected from being called an
asshole correct
okay especially if you're an asshole
well that's uh
uh but you don't have to be an asshole
to be called an asshole that's correct
and uh I think the internet has taught
me that well the internet is posed a
particular challenge to free speech
absolutist because of some of the stuff
that's on there is god-awful
but I have no different rule for freedom
of speech on the internet than I have uh
in newspapers or in lectures or in
classrooms or or conversations among
people what do you think about the
tension between freedom of speech and
freedom of reach as is uh kind of
sometimes termed so the internet really
challenges that aspect it allows the
speech to become viral and spread very
quickly to a very large number of people
but you know we've had we've had
Revolutions in um
in in the modalities of communication
after all newspapers were the first
challenge
um radio and television
posed A new challenge
um the FCC tried
But ultimately gave up the attempt to
control
um obscenity for example
um
and the Supreme Court has been pretty
close the one thing that liberal and
conservative Supreme Courts right now
we're in a conservative era due to Trump
nominations
um
during much of my life we were the
Warren Court it was uh William O Douglas
Brennan liberal Court
one thing they agree on is Free Speech
they don't agree on much else but they
do agree on free speech and I think the
reason is
that they recognize that well my group
is in the ascendance today but it may
not be tomorrow and I want to have
objective clear rules so that when I'm
in the minority I'm able to voice my
opinion
and so it's one of the few things that
both sides of the political Spectrum
agree on the only people who don't or
the the people way over on the right
that I call the fascists and the people
way over on the left who are the
Communists
um but with respect to most people in
this on the political Spectrum
Republicans Democrats socialists
Libertarians
um
they agree on the Primacy of free speech
because it protects them
when when protection is needed so to you
even on the internet
Free Speech absolutism should rule yes
nobody's gonna die remember the death
threats are not not protected
um nobody's gonna die
so people are going to be a little bit
insulted that's the price you pay for
living in a free society and it's a
small price in my view
um people some people don't have as
tough a hide as others well then develop
it um I hope everyone I don't mean to
sound uh cruel
um but you know you're living in a free
Society develop a tough hide
so that's the cost of living in a free
Society there's a cost the thing is that
it can really hurt at scale to be Cyber
Bullied to be attacked for the ideas the
express or maybe ideas you didn't
Express but that uh somebody decided to
lie about you and uh use that to attack
you well first of all there are there
were so there were some exceptions to
the First Amendment
libel and slander is an exception
um
direct threats are an exception you know
if you if you say such and such I will
murder you that is not lawful
if you say that it's somebody
um if you say about somebody oh you know
um you beat your wife
um that that is not lawful if in fact
the person knows you don't beat your
wife
there are some limits defamation is one
direct threats are another
um so it's not absolute this is not the
first amendment is not absolute but this
is it's more absolute than it is in any
other society and it's pretty near
absolute
um
for example fraud if you would sell
somebody a car and you say oh this is in
great running shape and in fact it's an
old jalopy and it's not going to make it
more than 10 miles
that's fraud that's not free speech
um so free speech is not absolute there
are these limits but they're very narrow
specific categories of limits
but uh this gray area here because while
legally you're not allowed to defame a
person
in the court of public opinion
especially with the aid of anonymity on
the internet
the rumors can spread
at scale thousands hundreds of thousands
of people can make up things about you
you have to defend yourself using more
speech we're we're big we're through
freedom of speech and we're big boys and
girls
um you have to defend yourself
um you know in in some societies if you
say something
um if you right now if you say something
nasty about Putin you'll end up in the
gulag
um if you say something nasty about
um you know Biden you end up in the New
York Times where would you rather be
well let's talk about
the thing you've done for over 20 years
which is fight for the freedom of speech
on college campuses
so why is freedom of speech important on
college campuses well it's important
everywhere in the society but it's most
important on college campuses why
because that's where we educate our
young citizens
and if you are educated
under a notion that some Dean can can
call you on the carpet because you say
something which is considered racist so
you can say something which is uh
considered uh then you know dangerous to
uh to the social cohesion
um then it's not a liberal arts college
now
um the um the theory that
I used in in the shadow University
a book you've written the shadow
Universe 1998
1998. you were ahead of a lot of these
things I'm afraid that as as a pessimist
I always saw the bad side of things
betrayal of Liberty on America's
campuses the shadow University the a
book you co-authored with the Alan
Charles yes with one of my Princeton
classmates Alan Charles cores who's now
an Emeritus professor of Enlightenment
history at the University of
Pennsylvania
I only taught for one semester and I can
go into that later the reason that I did
not continue to teach in colleges um it
was Harvard Law School I I taught a
course in the mid-1980s
um but in any event
um the college campuses are one of the
most important of all for uh for free
speech because this is where people get
education
and if you don't really get a good
education if certain points of view are
not allowed to be expressed because
education comes from The Clash of ideas
and you then have to decide this is the
this is how you become a thinking adult
you have to decide which ideas make more
sense to you which ones you're going to
follow
um the college experience is
transformative
and if there is censorship on campuses
it's highly destructive of the
educational Enterprise
and ultimately to the entire Society you
know we have in the Sciences
um we have a scientific method
so scientific method is you try
experiments and you see which ones work
and then you develop theories based to
public results of experiments well this
is not much different from every other
aspect of life
you have to entertain different views on
different subjects you hear all the
views and you make a decision as to
which one's accurate which one's not
so the scientific method I apply to
um to non-science to history to
journalism
um to all of these things so that
scientific method includes ideas hateful
ideas also correct if you don't allow
hateful ideas I mean when scientists do
experiments nobody says to them oh you
know don't don't do that experiment
because it would be very bad if that
turns out to be accurate you know that
outcome that's not the way it works
um
every every point of view is thrown into
the marketplace whether it's science or
whether it's a
you know non-science and that includes
uh the kind of ideas and the kind of
discourse that might actually lead to an
increase in hate on campuses the the the
First Amendment
prohibits speech which is liable to
produce
imminent imminent violence so for
example
um you know the um the exception is um
yelling uh falsely falsely yelling fire
in a crowded movie theater a lot of
people misstate it they say oh
um the exception is yelling fire in a
movie theater if there's really a fire
you're performing a real important
function
but it's falsely yelling fire you can
start a riot people would be crushed try
to get out
so there are these that that's one of
the exceptions that the First Amendment
as the Supreme Court has defined it
um
there are very few exceptions
um and defamation is an exception I'm a
I'm not a fan of that exception frankly
but um if you say something
um about somebody that has serious
implications in their uh in their life
and their ability their own living if
you say accuse somebody of being a
pedophile but it's not true
that person can sue you
um my own view is I think that's an
unfortunate exception but I'm not on the
Supreme Court
um I think that I'm I'm with I
a friend of mine was not hentoff
that hand tough who wrote for decades
for the Village Voice in New York
um
he was a friend of mine he was a free
speech absolutist
and uh he wrote a fabulous book called
free speech for me but not for thee
um and he was an absolutist and I'm I'm
with I'm with Matt hentoff even on the
defamation aspect I mean I agree with
you in some sense just practically
speaking it seems like
that the way the best way in the the
public sphere to defend against
deformation is with more speech correct
and through authenticity
authentic communication
um
of the truth as you see it yeah you know
it's the times the Boston Globe has said
something about me that it hasn't been
accurate they have invariably published
my letter to the editor
um I'm also uh not bashful about getting
in charge in touch with the reporter
that at the end of every column they
give the reporters email address
um
and I know people say that I I have more
access to the media than most people
um but um all that means is I get to
fame with the most people
can we also comment on from the
individual consumer of speech
there's a kind of uh sense that freedom
of speech means your you should be
forced to read all of it
freedom of speech versus freedom of
reach
we as consumers of speech do we have the
right to select what we read we do and
um that nobody can force us to sit in
the room and listen to a radio program
that we don't want to listen to nobody
can force us to read a book that we
don't want to read
um the whole notion of freedom of speech
means that people have uh autonomy on
their choices
in order to form a complete mind and
complete human being there's a kind of
tension
of that autonomy
versus consuming as many varied
perspectives as possible which is
underlying the ethic of free speech so
on college campuses
it seems like a good way to develop the
mind is to get as many perspectives as
possible even if you don't really want
to
well that's that is the theory academic
freedom is the is supposed to be the
highest degree of free speech yeah
um you should be able to entertain all
kinds of hateful
threatening ideas and and the way I put
it is there's something wrong when you
can say something with complete abandon
without any fear in Harvard Square
whereas on the other side of the fence
you can't say it in the Harvard Yard it
should be the opposite
and what happens is
um universities
from the best to the worst from the most
famous to the least well known
have been taken over by administrators
administrators do not really subsume
academic values they know nothing about
the Constitution they know nothing about
Free Speech they do nothing about
academic freedom they feel that their
job is to keep a water
and so they develop speech codes
kangaroo courts to enforce the speech
codes
and these are very dire developments I
wrote about them in the shadow
University in 98.
um and try to deal with them in 1999
when I started fire code started fire
and um
uh I would fire the reason I'm running
currently for the Harvard Board of
overseers is what I'd like to do is
convince the Harvard Corporation the
so-called president and fellows of
Harvard College the chief governing
board of the University with the real
power
um the board of office is is a secondary
body but quite influential
uh to fire 95 percent of the
administrators
it would have a salutary effect on the
academics of the University would have a
salutary effect on free speech and
academic freedom it would cut tuitions
by about 40 percent
um and it would create a whole different
atmosphere on the campus and the same
set of MIT or any other place
um I think administrators are a uh a a a
very uh
bad uh influence on American higher
education can you sort of elaborate uh
the intuition why this
thing that you call administrative bloat
is such a bad thing for a university so
first of all just in terms of the the
cost of yeah maintaining there are more
administrators in the American Education
than they were faculty members
the course is enormous number two
they are inimical to the uh the the
teaching Enterprise and and they feel
that their job is to control things to
make sure there are no problems that
nobody's feelings are hurt
um uh being called you know be before I
a Dean because you said something
um that insulted somebody is something
that shouldn't happen in American higher
education yet it happens because you
have these administrators who think it's
their job
to protect people from being insulted
you you insult a black student you
insult a woman
um there's a disciplinary hearing but
there shouldn't be
um
black people uh are accustomed to being
insulted Jews are cousins cousins women
or cousins being solid and it's very
good to know who doesn't like you it's
useful it is very you it's essential
information to know who doesn't like you
if everybody is forced to say I love you
and nobody can say I hate you you get a
false view of what life is all about
outside of the University outside the
university I mean you do graduate
eventually
and that's ultimately the mission of the
university is to prepare you to make you
into a great human being into a great
leader that can take on the problems of
the world correct and you don't do it by
by treating you like like a little
flower but what role does the University
have to protect students to women
African-Americans
anybody Jews anybody who gets killed you
could be a victim of hate speech they
they protect you from physical assault
if somebody physically assaults you
then they um they get punished but they
shouldn't and so they shouldn't protect
you against insult
because that is a violation of academic
freedom the freedom of the insulter to
insult you and also as I said it's very
useful to know who doesn't like you it's
useful for the so-called victim I think
is to said I want to know who doesn't
like me it's as important to me as
knowing who who likes me but do you also
believe in this open uh space of
discourse that the insulter will
eventually lose
I think that's true I think of the
insult or eventually
will wear out his or her welcome
um I do but I I like to know who the
insultism
because it gives you a deeper
understanding of human nature yeah and
and usually by the way my experience has
been that the insulters have generally
not been as smart as the people they've
insulted yeah and that's probably one of
the reasons they insult them because
they're if they feel inferior yeah I
mean I'm not trying to be a a a
psychoanalyst here but a lot of the
people who were the haters are pretty
low down in the intellectual scale
anyway 95 of administration you would
fire your calling to fire
95 of the administration people should
know I think
people that don't really think about the
structure the way the universities work
are not
familiar I think with the fact that
Administration there's a huge bloat of
administration you know when you think
about what makes a great University it's
about the students it's about the
faculty it's about the people that do
research if it's a research University
they don't think about the bureaucracy
of meetings and committees and rules and
paperwork and all that and all the
people that are involved with pushing
that kind of paper and there's a huge
cost to that but it also slows down and
suppresses the the beautiful variety
that makes the university great which is
the teaching the Student Life the
protests the the the
um the clubs all the fun that you can
have at University all the very kind of
exploration which you can't really do
once you graduate correct it's the place
the university is a place to really
explore
in every single way
so let me just talk about this important
thing because uh I'm very fortunate to
have contacted you
almost by accident in a very important
moment in your life you're running for
the Harvard Board of overseers uh what
is this board how much power does it
have
uh and what would you do if elected okay
first of all I have a I have a
prediction yes that in about five years
they're gonna probably change the name
because overseer is reminds people of
the slavery or yes and we're in a such a
politically correct era now that the
English language is being restricted
corrupted is the way I put it because
certain words are uh are forbidden we we
have some problems in this country and I
think part of the problem is the
educational system
has lost a sense of what academic
freedom and Free Speech were all about
and um and and
um I think it's essential that the
educational system begin to take more
seriously what Free Speech you know
they're feeling really are that's why
I'm running for the Harvard Board of
overseers so let me just link on the
uh the role of the administration in
protecting free speech so what often
happens I think you've written about
this is there's going to be a few maybe
a small number of hypersensitive
students and faculty that protests so
how does Harvard Administration
uh resist the influence of those
hypersensitive protesters in protecting
uh Speech and protecting even hate
speech
Harvard has done fairly well under the
presidency of Lawrence back how
I have had a couple of meetings with
backho
um I like back how
I have donated to Harvard a prince of my
Lake but my late wife took a picture of
Bob Dylan and Alan Ginsberg when the
Rolling Thunder review got to Harvard
Square
and it's a it's sort of an iconic
photograph she called it the music
lesson because it's got Dylan teaching
Ginsburg how to play the guitar
and I donated one of those to Harvard
it's hanging in back House Office
he the new president
Claudine gay is not known for respecting
academic freedom and Free Speech people
have said to me well give her a chance
well I'm willing to give her a chance
but she does have a record
and she's a bureaucrat
um I don't think she believes in free
speech and academic freedom I think
she's a progressive not a liberal
um I'm not happy with the the uh the the
the the appointment of Claudine gay and
it has made more essential my attempt to
get on the board of overseers
so let's talk about the board of
overseers and uh your run for it the
specifics actually it will be it'd be
nice because I think you're a writing
candidate
and the election is over on May 16th uh
yes and I think there's specifics I'll
probably give them in the intro I'll
give links to people but the specifics
are complicated let me just mention
that you have to be Harvard alumni so
I've graduated from Harvard you have to
in order to run in order to vote in
order to vote and the process I imagine
is not trivial but uh
it this is done online and if you're an
alumni you should have received an email
from a particular email address
harvard.mg
electionservicescorp.com and uh
presumably there's a way to get some
validation number from that email and
then you go online you enter that
validation number and you vote and you
to vote for Harvey you have to enter his
name
correctly Harvey silverglate and spell
it correctly
um obviously I'm imagining this because
I'm MIT not Harvard so I'm imagining the
process is not trivial because you have
to click on things you have to uh
uh sort of follow instructions that are
not uh trivial and uh I'll also provide
an email if the process is painful it
doesn't work for you that you can email
email Harvard and complain I.T help
harvard.edu and so on I'll provide all
the links but is there something else
you can say about the voting process uh
what you're running on this is my second
run
the first time I got enough signatures
to get on the ballot then the Harvard
Alumni Association sent out a letter
to all living Harvard alums
recommending that they vote for the
officially nominated candidates
that excluded two petition candidates of
whom I was one
and um
I wrote to the Alumni Association and I
said
you have now sent out the curriculum
vitais and the policy positions of all
the officially nominated candidates
there are two petition candidates on the
ballot
I would like to be able to send out my
positions
to the voters
they wrote me back saying our policy is
to only send out the policy positions
and the platforms of officially
nominated candidates can you believe
that
well this is a liberal arts college
right
um from the where from The Clash of
ideas truth emerges well really
this is what I call Harvard's not so
subtle means of candidate suppression
not voter suppression candidate
suppression
and um
everybody can vote but not everybody can
run
it is ill becomes a liberal arts college
where you know the Clash of ideas will
produce the truth will worry about the
class of ideas on the board of overseers
the board of overses is important it
doesn't have the same power and
authority as the Harvard Corporation the
so-called president and fellows of
Harvard College but it's very
influential
and very important and it would be a
great perch for me to try to exert
influence for the University to get back
to where it was before it was taken over
by the administrators well I'm pretty
sure that most of Harvard alumni most
the students currently going to Harvard
most The Faculty at Harvard probably
stand behind that ideas and the ideals
that you stand behind yep
the the people that love Harvard and
what it stands for so yeah the alumni
were educated in an era when these
Concepts were taken seriously and before
the administration's administrators took
over
so I do think if I get my message out
I'm going to win the seat and if I win a
seat I will have a great perch for for
trying to convince the real power that
be which is the Harvard Corporation
to do the things that I'm suggesting you
know get rid of 95 of the administrators
get rid of the speech codes reduce
tuition by 40 percent
all of these salutary benefits uh
can you imagine if Harvard became the
most affordable college in the United
States
well the affordability is another aspect
but I think before that the just the
freedom of expression freedom of speech
freedom of thought yeah it's America's
greatest universities I think is
something that everybody would agree on
it would have a it would have a a
tremendous effect on the whole country
and uh is there something to say about
the details of how difficult it is for
alumni to vote without experience with
this you could vote online or you can
vote by paper ballot you could request
the paper ballot
um and all I could say is that the the
hard part is getting the message out
um my name doesn't appear on the ballot
because I couldn't get enough signatures
um well Harvey Harvey silverglate
s-i-l-v-e-r-g-l-a-t you know when my
grandparents arrived from Russia
um the uh the the the name in Russian
was something like zilba glyph yeah and
the immigration officer had several
choices
he could have said Sylvia gate yeah gate
is a real silver and gate are real
English words yeah he could have said
silver Glade g-l-a-d-e those are real
English words that's how my name is
often the spelled neither Silver Gate or
silver Glade silver Glade is a nonsense
syllable
and why the immigration officer chose to
transliterate
silverglid as silverglade I'll never
understand and it is the cause of
endless mistakes in my name well the the
fundamental absurdity of life yes is
also the source of his Beauty yes anyway
we shall spell it out and we shall get
uh yell loud and wide that everybody who
has ever graduated from Harvard should
vote for you if they believe in the
ideals of the Great American
universities which I think most people
do
let me also ask about uh diversity
inclusion and Equity programs you've
been you've had a few harsh words to say
about those you know the idea of
diversity I think is a beautiful idea uh
you've said that Harvard's idea of
diversity is for everyone to look
different and think alike correct can
you elaborate and be comfortable and be
comfortable yeah first of all it is
impossible if liberal laws education is
taken seriously it's impossible for
students to feel comfortable why because
one of the roles of college is to
challenge all the beliefs that they grew
up with which mostly are the beliefs
inculcated by parents and by Elementary
School teachers
and the idea is to be able to challenge
those thoughts those ideas
and if you don't have free speech and
academic freedom those views get reified
they do not get challenged
so it's it is it it violates the
fundamental role of higher educational
institutions to have any restrictions at
all
that that's number one
number two as I think I said earlier if
people students are not allowed to be
frank with one another they don't really
learn about one another
uh and um uh you know I I've given a lot
of lectures in which I have said and I
think people students Now understand it
I'm much more interested in hearing from
the people who Haven and the people who
love me
I'm much more interested in knowing who
disagrees with it and people who agree
with me
that's how I learn and that's how they
learn
The Clash of ideas
which is the theory behind the First
Amendment
that truth will somehow emerge or if not
Truth at least a better truth a true
truth a more useful truth if ideas are
allowed to Clash especially in the
structure of a university where at least
I would say there's some set of rules
some set of Civility I think I would
rather read mineconf
to understand people that hate there is
also quality uh to disagreement that we
should strive for and I think a
university is a place where when uh
disagreement and even hate is allowed
it's done in a high effort way you know
somebody asked me once about what books
I would what I have is required reading
in in literature courses and I listed my
account
and they were horrified and I said well
it's one of the most important books of
the 20th century yeah I mean six million
Jews died an enormous number of other
people died because one guy wrote a book
called mineconf and took it seriously
it's one of the most important books
ever written how can how can an educated
person not have at least breezed through
Mein Kampf and um it's not a great read
though it's not a great read he was not
a great writer but you you do get a
sense for the the sociopath that was
Adolf Hitler yes because he really acted
on the words that he wrote yeah
and it was there and if people took that
work seriously correct they they would
have understood it's one of the most
important books of the 20th century and
if it's Politically Incorrect to read it
crazy
but can you uh speak to the
um
the efforts to increase diversity in
universities which I think is embodied
in this die effort of diversity
inclusion and Equity programs where do
they go right where did do they go wrong
okay let me tell you first of all this
may surprise a lot of people
I am opposed to affirmative action
um and I think that
um what it does is it
labels people by their race
by their religion and by their national
origin
precisely what we don't want people to
do is be pigeonholed in those categories
the reason that affirmative action has
become the way that universities decide
on who gets admitted
is because historically people in what's
called marginalized groups
blacks gays Hispanics
have been discriminated against in the
admissions process
now
what I have suggested
is that instead of affirmative action
and by the way
here's a prediction the Supreme Court is
going to abolish affirmative action
there's a case penis Harvin case
um it's the there's a there are two
cases joined together one of a public
university and one of a private
universities the private university is
Harvard
uh I I predict that the Supreme Court
will vote six to three to abolish
affirmative action
it is on its face it is a violation of
equal protection of the law
some groups are favored because of race
or ethnicity it is a classic violation
of equal protection clause
when affirmative action was approved
this deciding vote was just the Sandra
Day O'Connor she wrote a very famous
opinion in which she said
I am hesitate to vote to up to keep up
there to affirm the notion of
affirmative action because it's such an
obvious violation of equal protection
but we have an urgent problem in the
society we are not educating our um
members of racial ethnic minorities and
we have to try to get them into colleges
um so I'm I think it should be approved
for 25 years
um
and um it will uh it should be it should
in 25 years they should have performed
this role well it hasn't and um the 25
years is coming up I think it's for
three or four years left
the Supreme Court is going to abolish it
you can take my word for them
because it's such an obvious violation
of equal protection
why do why did affirmative action come
into play
because the secondary and elementary
schools are so bad
public secondary in elementary schools
are so bad
why are they so bad partly because of
the control of the teachers union
has Randy Weingarten runs the public
school system in the United States
and what I have suggested
is that
the effort should be
to uh this is an emergency it's a
national emergency
to improve
the quality of Elementary and secondary
education
and one way to do it is to hire teachers
who are fabulous teachers rather than
necessarily members of the Union
I have come to oppose
public workers unions I am a very strong
supporter of unions in the private
sector
why do I think there's such a difference
between unions in the public sector and
the private sector
in the private sector management is
arguing
bargaining with its own money and with
the money of shareholders
in the public sector there's only one
side
there is the teachers union and then
there's a school committee that is
dealing with the taxpayers money not
their room and so it's a very skewed
Power Balance
so
as supportive as I am of private sector
unions I am an opposition of Public
Safety unions they're very destructive
and I think without the teachers union
teachers who are really skilled will be
able to get jobs they would not have to
worry about the seniority of teachers
who long since have given up really
creative
teaching
and we have to improve the public
educational system
I had um in my late wife and I
um uh had a classmate of we have a son
who's Now 44 who went to the public
schools in Cambridge
um he has a friend
first name Eugene
who was black kid from Roxbury whose
mother understood that the schools in
Roxbury were terrible the schools in
Cambridge were pretty good
he lived in our house
Monday to Friday and he went to school
with Isaac in the Cambridge Public
Schools
elsewhere and I would show up the school
committee meetings when there was
bargaining between the teachers union
and the school committee
that teaches Union objected to our being
there
we argued we're taxpayers we have a a
kid in the school and we have his best
friend lives with us
and goes to school with them
we have a real interest
and the school committee
walked out of the bargaining session
the city council then reconsidered his
vote and they voted that we that
citizens
taxpayers parents of kids in the school
could not show up
to these negotiation sessions
I thought that was absolutely outrageous
but I understood why because these
contracts are crazy
no sane municipality
should enter into some of these
contracts
um and um so I am I have become an
opponent of the national Teachers
Association the Cambridge teaching a lot
okay with Teachers Association
I don't think there should be unions for
public employees
because there's no real bargaining going
on
and um I think that the public school
system will never be improved as long as
the the the teachers are unionized
so that to you as at the core of the
problem that results in the kind of
inequality of opportunity that
affirmative action is designed to solve
so if you if the educational system in
the Elementary and high school levels is
improved we wouldn't need affirmative
action these kids would get good
educations
so from all backgrounds
poor kids in the United States will get
good education if uh
uh public unions are abolished correct
and but do you mind incidentally the
Postal Service would probably work
better too
that's a whole nother conversation but
do you at the core of the problem of the
inequality in in universities
that diversity inclusion and Equity
programs are trying to solve is the
public education system correct of
secondary education yes correct
Elementary and second Elementary and
secondary education well then is there
use what is the benefit what is the
drawback of uh d i e diversity inclusion
and Equity programs Universities at
Harvard it's an affirmative action
basically and what it does is it allows
the system of Elementary and secondary
education to be bad because they could
say oh we got our kids into Harvard yes
but you haven't educated them
and it covers up the wound
and I think it will never improve as
long as we're able to cover up the wound
and as I said affirmative action is
going to be abolished by the Supreme
Court
it's a clear violation of equal
protection there's what's Santa's Day
O'Connor understood but ignored
intentionally but as an experiment
uh and um I believe it's going to be
abolished that that's going to have
that's going to force
the Elementary and high schools to get
serious
do you see the same issues that you
discussed now at Harvard uh at MIT we're
here in Boston so I have to talk about
the the great universities here in
Boston you've written about MIT I'm uh
the university I love I'm a research
scientist there do you see the same kind
of issues there yes I do do you remember
can you explain the case of Dorian
Abbott lecture that was canceled at MIT
yeah well you know it's this is this is
not the only it's not the only incident
um there have been incidents all around
the country
um of academics professors who have used
the don't comport with the uh as the
great Lillian Hellman another friend of
my late wife
said they they they
she said she refused to cut her garments
in order to fit the Fashions of the day
um Dorian Abbott didn't cut his suit um
to fit the Fashions of the day in his
intellectual suit
and so he was um this has happened at
Princeton this has happened at Harvard
this has happened at MIT
the great universities in the country
um have decided that the Clash of ideas
is not such a good idea because some
people's feelings will be heard
well this is there was quite a revolt
against it
um fire
sounded the alarm
and then in the end the universities
were I believe Abbott was invited to
come back I think he turned him down
he he shouldn't have turned him down but
he did
um and um when when the light is cast
upon these situations the universities
back down because they're so embarrassed
yeah
um and the newspapers because newspapers
depend on the First Amendment
in order to exist newspapers tend to
give pretty good publicity to these
cases of censorship so they grow the
universities yes so they they really
emphasize they catalyze the
embarrassment yes so is that one of the
ways is that the best way to fight all
of this yes sunshine is the best
disinfectant uh you've written about
mit's connection to Jeffrey Epstein yes
he was well connected at MIT and at
Harvard
um what do you what lessons do you draw
about human nature about universities
about all this from from this Saga let
me say this
I believe that universities
if somebody was to for example donate
to a university and donates on the
requirement that the building be named
after them if the university is taking
the donations and the person is funding
a building
the building should be named after him
or them Harvard is facing us now at the
Sackler building because the sacklers
had become now a persona non grata
because of their role in producing the
opioids that cause the huge
scandalous opioid addiction
there are people who want to have
removed the name the Sackler from the
Sackler Art Museum and however
Larry bakhow the president of Harvard to
his credit
has refused to to do that
um and um if it reminds people that the
money was earned through selling opioids
that's good that's good that people
understand that that's where the
cyclists got their money they should be
bonded in the mic in in my um uh
undergraduate alma mater Princeton
there's a movement to remove the name
Woodrow Wilson
because Wilson was president of
Princeton before he became governor of
New Jersey before he became president of
states
how he got to be Governor New Jersey was
he was someone sufferable that the
trustees of Princeton got an
denomination to run for governor of New
Jersey they had said we had to get this
guy out of here
um and um
not because it was anti-black and
anti-semitic because the trustees were
as well but because he just was
insufferable he drove the faculty crazy
and they got him out
um and um so Princeton was thinking of
changing the name I wrote a letter to
President Ice Prince saying you know the
the this is part of the University's
history you don't want to re you want to
rewrite history falsely uh Woodrow
Wilson was the president of this
institution he was one of your
predecessors he never answered me either
um I think these people you know they
they know they have no answer
the reason I didn't get a response from
president ice group is the same as the
reason I didn't get a response from the
Headmaster of Milton Academy they
understand that what they're doing is
violative of the fundamental precepts of
academic institutions they're ashamed
they that they feel they have no choice
because they feel that they would be
criticized for racism homophobia
criticized by how many people well they
feel that they would be criticized by
students and parents and donors I
disagree with that I actually think
there are more people out there that
agree with me than agree with them yeah
by a large margin by a large margin in
what I call the real world which is the
world outside the campus
but academics are afraid they'd be
criticized they're incredibly thin skin
when I say academics I mean academic
administrators they're very thin-skinned
politically correct holier than now
um as I said I would fire 90 95 of them
and I would be more um careful in who I
elected to leave this institutions so I
said Pauline gay is probably going to be
a disaster at Harvard
so it takes guts it takes courage to be
in the administration when the task of
protecting the freedom of speech is
there and also
um which in part requires
you to admit and to uphold the mistakes
you've done in the past correct not to
hide them correct and that do you do you
I mean Jeffrey Epstein for Harvard and
for MIT is a very recent mistake well
there's a debate whether it's a mistake
they took money from him yes okay
is it a mistake to take money from bad
people
do you have to do a morals test of a
potential donor
I don't think so
um It's Complicated because if there are
no conditions attached to it I think
it's emotionally complicated I don't
think that it is rationally complicated
um it's emotionally complicated it's
particularly complicated if they want
naming rights
yes you know the Jeff Jeffrey Epstein
biological Laboratory
um that that would be a problem for most
universities
um I don't think that naming rights have
to be given
to somebody that you that you don't
think is worthy of having their name I
think the university has the right to
say no we'll we'll take your money but
we will not name the building a few I
think they have a right to do that
there's some degree in which you
whitewash the name though if you not not
with naming rights but
if you take the money it allows the
person
in uh public discourse to say that
they're collaborating they're working
together with Harvard and with MIT I
have a problem with universities making
morals tests of the donors
because not every donor is as bad as
everything but some of the donors made
their money in Industry by being
rapacious uh by
paying low wages by exploiting people
you can uh make the case that
accepting money from the Department of
Defense from DARPA from the United
States organizations that uh contributed
to Waging War and killing hundreds of
thousands of civilians over the past few
decades correct
um folks like the 10-year Professor Noam
chomski who make the case that that is
far more evil than
accepting money from Jeffrey Epps yes
still Jeffrey Epstein is a known
pedophile yes
so that's why I say I would I would not
give him naming rights
I think the university has the autonomy
to not give naming rights
but I think giving morals tested donors
is a is a Pandora's Box
what do you think about the aftermath of
the Jeffrey Epstein Saga it feels like
I'm not familiar with Harvard's response
but mit's response seemed to
um fire a few scapegoats
and it didn't seem like a genuine
response
of two
the evils that uh human beings are
capable of sort of like rising to the
surface the description in a fully
transparent way of all the interactions
that happen with Jeffrey Epstein and
what that means
um yeah what that means about the the
role of money in universities what that
means about just human beings in power
money money is essential to run a
university one of the reasons is
essential is because the university is
artificially
requires huge amounts of money and
that's partly because of the
administrative Army that they that they
they
support
and they wouldn't be less dependent on
the Jeffrey epsteins of the world if
they didn't have
the the so it's sort of all part of the
same Circle
but there's attention here you're saying
we shouldn't be putting a morals test on
money but actually if you