College Republicans’ reaction hypocritical


Hypocrisy knows no bounds for some members of the College Republicans at the University of Southern California. I say this in response to their remarks about Angela Davis, a civil rights activist and communist who spoke on campus Monday.

The day of Davis’ speech, the College Republicans published statements on their official Facebook page. The first (which has been removed) read, “[Davis] has no place on our campus and should have never been invited to speak.” It was accompanied by a graphic that read, “Shame on the groups responsible for bringing murderer communist Angela Davis to USC tonight.”

The College Republicans hosted Ann Coulter on campus two years ago, a speaker whose bigotry toward race, the Muslim religion and sexual orientation is well known. Viewed in the most positive light, their statements about Davis are blatantly hypocritical. At worst, they are a gross form of offensive character assassination.

The worst thing about arguing that Davis should not have been invited is that it places disagreement with Davis’ opinion on a higher pedestal than a defense of her First Amendment right to express that opinion. Given their devotion to the Constitution, one would expect the College Boat Shoe Club to be extra-staunch defenders of Davis’ right to free speech, but the only support they gave to those seeking to be heard was to their own members:

“It is important that the voices of those students who do not agree with Davis, and her presence on campus are heard!” another Facebook post read.

To defend your right to disagree, you must defend the right to free speech in the first place. The post linked to a video of one of their members, Jalani Smith, who was interviewed by a USC television station about his disagreement with Davis’ talk. Smith began by saying he disagreed with what Davis had to say — and then gave his credibility a significant boost by admitting he didn’t even go to the talk.

The released statements, in the style of 1950s communist purge master Sen. Joe McCarthy, continued:

“The African-American students in the USC College Republicans are particularly disheartened that Davis has been branded as a leader in the Black community…” their statement began. It continued by calling Davis “an enemy to the fundamental American ideals of economic freedom, individual liberty, and self-determination.”

I asked Ama Konadu, the former director of the Black Student Assembly, what she thought.

“The College Republicans said ‘Our African-American members are disheartened…’ that sounds to me like saying ‘I’m not racist, I have black friends,’” she said. “Black Republicans are so prideful in the country and systems that have oppressed our people since day one and that continue to do so.”

It gets worse. The text accompanying the graphic calling Davis a “murderer communist,” that has since been taken down, read, “[Davis] is personally responsible for the murder of four individuals including a judge.”

The accusation refers to Davis’ arrest and trial for murder, kidnapping and criminal conspiracy stemming from a 1970 courtroom attack where four individuals died. While Davis was not present during the attack, the guns were registered in her name. In 1972, an all-white jury found her not guilty of every charge levied against her.

Calling Davis personally responsible for a murder she did not commit is an infuriating, false and deeply saddening action. In much the same way that Davis’ right to speak should be protected by free speech, so too should the nonsense espewed by groups like the College Republicans. But the reckless use of the right to free speech always has social consequences. While Davis might make for an easy target because she is a public figure, the sort of incendiary mudslinging could easily backfire for the College Republicans in another context, in the form of a lawsuit for online defamation.

That aside, it seems a finding of not guilty in a court of law now stands next to the First Amendment on the list of things the USC College Republicans have demonstrated an extreme disdain, if not ignorance for. That must be corrected.

The College Republicans should issue a written statement on behalf of the group, addressed to the Black Student Assembly and the Speaker’s Committee, that apologizes for calling Angela Davis a “murderer” and suggesting that she should have never been invited to speak. Anyone in the group’s executive leadership who wrote or sanctioned the post should immediately resign from their positions.

The College Republicans have demonstrated an attitude completely out of touch with reality. Slandering and calling for the censorship of a speaker with whom they disagree is entirely counter to the meaningful exchange of ideas, a value that all politically minded students, regardless of party affiliation, should defend at all costs.

Nathaniel Haas is a junior majoring in political science and economics. His column, “State of the Union,” runs Fridays. 

10 replies
  1. Cuthbert Allgood
    Cuthbert Allgood says:

    Does this “junior majoring in political science” really believe that the right to free speech means the right to have access to any forum for their speech? Clearly USC needs to review their constitution classes.

  2. Vince Skolny
    Vince Skolny says:

    “The worst thing about arguing that Davis should not have been invited is that it places disagreement with Davis’ opinion on a higher pedestal than a defense of her First Amendment right to express that opinion. ”

    It’s unfortunate that a high school graduate, much less a student at a school like USC, could be so ignorant of such rudimentary issues. Whatever one thinks of the College Republicans, this has exactly nothing to do with First Amendment rights or their infringement.

  3. Liberty Minded
    Liberty Minded says:

    noun

    1.

    a person who pretends to have virtues, moral or religious beliefs, principles, etc., that he or she does not actually possess, especially a person whose actions belie stated beliefs.

    2.

    a person who feigns some desirable or publicly approved attitude, especially one whose private life, opinions, or statements belie his or her public statements.

  4. Anonymous
    Anonymous says:

    I would like to applaud you for writing this piece. Your arguments are on point and you’re really saying what needs to be said. The USC College Republicans acted disgracefully and as a student at USC, I am embarrassed to have any affiliation with such a group (even if it is just the affiliation of attending the same university). While they may not agree with Davis’ politics, which is completely acceptable, the way the situation was handled and continues to be handled is unacceptable (regarding their recent press release).

    In regards to this article, your “journalistic integrity” has only improved. Your articles have successfully brought to life multiple social issues on campus and I would like to thank you for that.

    • roccolore
      roccolore says:

      You liberal fascists prove your hypocrisy. You want to get pro-America and pro-Israel voices off campus.

    • roccolore
      roccolore says:

      Liberal hypocrites make every effort to ban pro-America and pro-Israel voices on campus.

  5. Anonymous
    Anonymous says:

    I’m sorry, but this isn’t journalism. It’s supplying mudslingers with more mud. Can our school newspaper spend its time not calling out on-campus student groups? Shouldn’t we be talking about the College Republicans’ right to free speech? Shouldn’t we be talking about how DT and PSA ignored parts of Davis’ backstory? Is it fair to expect someone such as Jelani– nice job getting his name right– Smith to have attended the event when he disagrees with the speaker’s image?

Comments are closed.