Table of Contents
Was What Happened at Columbia āCivil Disobedienceā?
³Ū±š²õ³Ł±š°ł»å²¹²āās Inside Higher Ed featured an article by Elizabeth Redden entitled ā.ā The story focuses on varying student and outside groupsā reactions to this monthās struggles over free speech on that campus, most prominently including the Minutemen incident where students stormed the stage to protest a controversial speaker, leading to a violent melee. The article reports that while outside of Columbia condemnation of the protestorsā actions is widespread, opinions within Columbia have proven to be more ambiguous.
Itās both interesting and illuminating to read the different views of the incident from different groups. However an important point that could easily be overlooked is a point Āé¶¹“«Ć½IOS President Greg Lukianoff and others made in this article about lawful protesting versus ā.ā Greg said:
It seems like they sincerely believed that they had every right to jump up onto the stage to actually disrupt the speech, that it was part of their free speech rights. Thatās absolutely wrong; you donāt have a free speech right to disrupt an event.
The article goes on: āStorming the stage could be seen as an incident of civil disobedience, Lukainoff said, but only if the protestors did so with the intent that they would accept the designated punishment.ā
This is crucial. All too often, we see the term ācivil disobedienceā used to identify incidents like that of the Columbia Minutemen speech. Hereās a tip: if youāre in a brawl, itās not civil disobedience. There are two important components of civil disobedience: first, your disobedience has to be nonviolent, if not precisely ācivil.ā Shouting loud slogans, braving fire hoses, etc., are not particularly civil, but they are nonviolent. Thoreau refused to pay his taxes as part of civil disobedience in order to protest slavery and war. But once you start a fight or a riot, you are out of the realm of civil disobedience.
Second, you have to be prepared to endure the punishment prescribed by the lawāsimply because you are engaged in ācivil disobedienceā does not make unlawful behavior any more lawful. If storming a stage is your act of civil disobedience (assuming you are peacefully doing so), you must be prepared to be treated like anyone else who storms a stage and shouts down a speaker. It makes no difference if you are shouting down a āracistā speaker like Minutemen founder Jim Gilchrist or protesting an āoffensiveā play like that written by Chris Lee at Washington State Universityāstorming a stage and stopping a performance is disruptive, and the police or security are well within their rights to stop you.
Indeed, enduring the punishment for civil disobedience is an integral part of the protest. Part of the reason for the power of Martin Luther Kingās āā is that it is written from a jail cell that he was put in for practicing civil disobedience. A hypothetical āLetter from Birmingham Country Club,ā even if written in identical words, would obviously have less effect. Neither King, nor , nor Gandhi would recognize what happened at Columbia as a valid exercise of ācivil disobedience.ā
Recent Articles
Āé¶¹“«Ć½IOSās award-winning Newsdesk covers the free speech news you need to stay informed.

Brendan Carrās Bizarro World FCC

Day 100! Abridging the First Amendment: Zick releases major resource report on Trumpās executive orders ā First Amendment News 468Ā

Detaining Ćztürk over an op-ed is unlawful and un-American
