The University of Oklahoma frat song: hate speech, the university, and liberty
Some drunken frat boys (it’s not clear how many) from the SAE chapter at the University of Oklahoma sang a very racist song while on a chartered bus and were videotaped doing it. So now the national fraternity has banned the chapter and the U. of Oklahoma has closed the house down and expelled the two student ringleaders.
The university’s president David Boren said:
To those who have misused their free speech in such a reprehensible way, I have a message for you. You are disgraceful. You have violated all that we stand for. You should not have the privilege of calling yourselves “Sooners.” Real Sooners are not racist. Real Sooners are not bigots. Real Sooners believe in equal opportunity. Real Sooners treat all people with respect. Real Sooners love each other and take care of each other like family members…
All of us will redouble our efforts to create the strongest sense of family and community. We vow that we will be an example to the entire country of how to deal with this issue. There must be zero tolerance for racism everywhere in our nation.
Boren is also quoted as having said the following:
Would I be happy if they left voluntarily? Yes. We don’t have room for racists and bigots here…I don’t want them here. I’ll pay the bus fare to get them out. They’re not coming back.
Where to begin?
I guess I’ll start here: the song the brothers sang was racist, bigoted, and deplorable.
But then I go here, to Volokh on the law on the matter:
…[R]acist speech is constitutionally protected, just as is expression of other contemptible ideas; and universities may not discipline students based on their speech. That has been the unanimous view of courts that have considered campus speech codes and other campus speech restrictions ”” see here for some citations. The same, of course, is true for fraternity speech, racist or otherwise…Likewise, speech doesn’t lose its constitutionally protection just because it refers to violence ”” “You can hang him from a tree,” “the capitalists will be the first ones up against the wall when the revolution comes,” “by any means necessary” with pictures of guns, “apostates from Islam should be killed.”…
To be sure, in specific situations, such speech might fall within a First Amendment exception. One example is if it is likely to be perceived as a “true threat” of violence (e.g., saying “apostates from Islam will be killed” or “we’ll hang you from a tree” to a particular person who will likely perceive it as expressing the speaker’s intention to kill him); but that’s not the situation here, where the speech wouldn’t have been taken by any listener as a threat against him or her…
Under the First Amendment, though, the government ”” including Oklahoma University ”” generally cannot add to this [social] price, whether the offensive speech is racist, religiously bigoted, pro-revolutionary, or expressive of any other viewpoint, however repugnant it might be.
There’s much much more; I suggest you read the whole thing.
If President Boren is aware of the law at all, he probably thinks he’s gotten around it by expelling the two students for the offense of having “created a hostile learning environment for others,” which must be a way of saying it’s not for “mere speech” that they were expelled. How a song on a private bus can do that I don’t know, but if it does then any racist communication (except when talking to oneself, and even then I suppose a person might be overheard) would fit the bill as well.
I find the whole thing chilling. What’s next, thoughtcrime?
These are the questions that come to mind; I’d like to ask them of Boren and the supporters of his actions:
(1) Had it been a black fraternity singing a song hostile to whites, would/should the same remedy have been applied?
(2) Had it been a black or white fraternity singing a song hostile to Jews, Asians, or any other ethnic group, would/should the same remedy have been applied?
(3) If (as is alleged) not all the SAE fraternity members participated in the singing on the bus, why is it okay for Boren to paint them all with the same brush by closing down the entire building and make them all move out immediately, without alternate housing? And by his remarks to seemingly insinuate they all should voluntarily quit the university?
(4) If their speech is intolerable, where do you draw the line? Should any speech that even smacks of racism trigger expulsion? And again, what if the speech is against another group: whites, Jews, Asians, Hispanics, women, men, gays, straights?
My libertarian tendencies come to the fore on this one. I find the SAE song to be vile, but I find it far more chilling that people can be expelled from a state school for hate speech of any kind (other than actual incitement to violence), and that includes hate speech against groups of which I am a member. I also find it chilling that people can be punished for hate speech in which they did not even participate but to which they were merely spectators. If a person is a member of a club and on a group excursion, are they responsible for what every member of that group does? I certainly don’t think so. On the other hand, I have no problem with the national fraternity suspending the Oklahoma chapter, or even with the university suspending the chapter as well. That is their prerogative.
In closing, I’ll add that the statement of President Boren’s that chills me the most is “There must be zero tolerance for racism everywhere in our nation.” I realize that many people would hear my objection as support for racism. Nothing could be further from the truth. My objection is testament to my commitment to free speech, and my understanding that the only way to achieve “zero tolerance for racism everywhere in the nation” would be by a stifling of liberty so Draconian as to amount to tyranny. Those who would curtail liberty always do it “for your own good,” and those convinced of their own righteousness are the most ruthless of all.
On Campus, the only hate speech that’s okay is against Jews as long as you call Jews “Zionists.”
Well, the only race related hate speech. You can hate conservatives and libertarians all you want too.
“To those who have misused their free speech”
What free speech, exactly, did they misuse? Sounds like they had none.
The cook is collateral damage …
I guess he won’t pee in the soup no mo’e ….
Doesn’t this mean that rap music should also be banned? As a woman, I find the word bitches to be offensive, but I guess women are on a differednt step of the victimhood ladder.
You make a good point, Neo. As vile as racist speech is, we must remember that we are a Constitutional Republic — and that free speech is protected in the Constitution. As such, it must be held in higher regard than the desire to punish racism, which is NOT Constitutionally protected.
I hate to say it, but we need someone to be George Carlin here, and demonstrate that offensive speech IS protected and MUST BE protected. How far down this slippery slope must we go, before public criticism of the President is grounds for arrest?
In a more immediate sense, if vile speech is NOT protected, we might as well shut down the Internet right now…
It’s already thought crime.
Technology strikes yet again.
We all know this a one street.
President Boren probably had Holder and Ferguson on his mind. The admin loves yes men.
“How far down this slippery slope must we go, before public criticism of the President is grounds for arrest?” [Daniel in Brookline]
A question best put to Sen. Robert Menendez or Nakoula Basseley Nakoula among others.
I find the whole thing chilling. What’s next, thoughtcrime?
Yes.
These vile PC jerks would happily create a totalitarian hell where no one ever says anything they don’t like. And they’ll think they’d done a wonderful thing–until the day their Stalin has them taken out and shot.
Last year, at the same university, a black football player knocked unconscious a petite blonde woman who was defending her friend against an anti-gay slur. Not only was this not a national news story, but the “student-athlete” in question was not expelled and is now, following a brief suspension, back on the team, his “scholarship” intact.
The would still think they had done a good thing while being taken out and shot. They just would be thinking “if only Stalin knew”
There are words you can’t say anymore, or you get ostracized. But the same people who are crying about those words, say whatever they want, and if you call them on it…you get called racist. (or worse)
We used to be a nation where Illinois Nazis were allowed to march in public. We laughed at them, and a good time was had by all.
Why do leftists have to ruin everything?
Martin wrote:
The[y] would still think they had done a good thing while being taken out and shot. They just would be thinking “if only Stalin knew”
Good point. Correction noted.
The UOK Pres, David Boren was earlier the governor, then US senator from OK.
Like W and GHWB, he went to Yale, was/is in Skull and Bones.
Like the president of UVA (and the president of Duke) he has condemned a whole group of young men for thealleged acts of a few; in OK’s case, Constitutionally protected Free Speech.
Boren is a member of the Ruling Class.
We had better understand that liberal fascism is here.
I tested PJ Media yesterday, and that nominal bastion of conservatism disallows use of the N-word. We had also better understand that, like Whittaker Chambers rejecting communism, we are on the losing side, whether or not we are armed per the 2nd Amendment. I know you will tell me that PJM can’t afford the use of the N-word on its site (‘twould diminish its outreach), but that is exactly how free speech is quashed.
And the FCC is going to “regulate” the Internet.
Let me first state I agree almost entirely with Neo’s analysis and opinion on this matter.
However, I think mf is correct in that Boren’s action was likely mindful of Obama/Holder as well as the Sharpton – led racial grievance industry. Boren is both a university administrator (and thus likely to lack vertebrae in any controversial situation) and a former politician (thus mindful of hard political realities of race relations at present). His draconian response was likely motivated by a sincere desire to protect OU, from a Justice Department inquisition and from sensationalized media firestorm with accompanying boycott until Sharpton’s absurd and arbitrary demands were met. The first amendment rights of a small group of immature frat boys (along with a few innocents as collateral damage) is a small cost for a significant benefit.
Again, I’m not saying I agree with Boren. But I understand his logic given the present state of race relations.
Ackler:
Poster Artfldgr gave us a word for what is going on. It is taken from the Nazis and is descriptive of how they put their system in place. The word is “Gleichschaltung”. It is defined here:
http://www.history-ontheweb.co.uk/concepts/concept72_gleichschaltung.htm
For a long time Oklahoma’s been known as a minor university attached to a major football program. OK, so that’s snobby and an exaggeration, there’s still some truth to it. The university has already lost one recruit who’d previously committed to the football program, and the head coach has been very vocal in his condemnation of the fraternity boys. Losing more football players — or even the possibility of a boycott — is a very real fear for the university administration. Maybe this is too obvious to note, but I haven’t seen it reported yet.
1. The kids expelled aren’t going to appeal. They will never return to that school.
2. The freshman pictured in the video is from Dallas Jesuit. Very, very sad and disappointed.
“Had it been a black fraternity singing a song hostile to whites, would/should the same remedy have been applied?”
Most likely there is a course, for credit, in which they already are hostile to whites. So, the fraternity would simply get extra credit.
I have a vivid childhood memory of going to see the movie “Exodus” in downtown Boston with my Hebrew school class. We had to walk through a picket line set up by the American Nazi Party (George Lincoln Rockwell’s bunch). Our teacher told us to walk single file through the picket line, shoulders back, heads up, eyes open (we were all about 11 at the time and the “Stormtroopers” looked huge to us). The Nazis were a small group, 6 or 7, in uniform, with swastika armbands, and clearly under order to not provoke. Our teacher made of point of telling us that however vile their views and writings, the Nazis had a right to demonstrate in the manner that they did under the first amendment to the Constitution.
Just sayin’
Neo said:
“In closing, I’ll add that the statement of President Boren’s that chills me the most is “There must be zero tolerance for racism everywhere in our nation.””
Chilling indeed. Totalitarianism is here already.
A phrasing such as “a misuse of free speech” is inherently contradictory; for a speech to qualify as “_MIS_used”, such speech as is “(properly) used” must first be defined and mandated, the very act of which would defy its “free” nature.
Exceptions made for few specific categories of speech that, on higher grounds, cannot be legally protected – I can think of libel, fraud, incitement to violence – there can be no such thing as a “misuse” of speech.
One may well argue that there can be such a thing as a speech that conforms to or violates one’s, or communal, notions of *propriety* – but that is a very different framing from the one which portrays it as a “misuse” of a tool that, by its very definition (“free”), cannot be required to adhere to particular forms or purposes.
These people fail to grasp that even great incivility does not imply a violation of a legally protected interest – and that, if it did, it would be a liberticidal slippery slope. Hence the First Amendement.
From the blog Gates of Vienna, I have learned that in many European countries there are groups calling themselves “anti-fascists”.
People who are opposed to Muslim immigration and the creeping Islamization of their countries are considered to be racists, xenophobes, and by extension, “fascists”.
The “anti-fascists” confront them during their protests, heaping verbal abuse on them and even resorting to physical intimidation. The authorities and media look the other way.
The “anti-fascists” resemble nothing so much as Nazi brownshirts.
In the face of intimidation from the DOJ and race hustlers like Sharpton and Ben Crump, WASPs crumble. And yes, it is about money and football. (Which is big money for schools like Oklahoma.) David Boren knew that there would be a fire storm, which would cost OU a ton of litigation money, good will, and football revenue. So he bowed to the Gods of PC.
The punishment, however, was draconian by any standards. Kick ALL the fraternity members out of their house and ban the fraternity? Company punishment for guilt by association. That’s done to make a big show for the race hustle industry, not to mete out reasoned justice. It is to weep.
j e Says:
March 10th, 2015 at 4:42 pm
Last year, at the same university, a black football player knocked unconscious a petite blonde woman who was defending her friend against an anti-gay slur.
Your characterization of both the incident and subsequent punishment are ridiculous.
Even though I’m not about to defend the ballplayer’s actions, you seem conveniently to have skipped mentioning that the woman involved has a track record comparable to Crystal Mangum of Duke lacrosse notoriety. And that she was doing far more than simply “defending a friend.”
A surveillance tape from the business in which the assault took place shows the “petite blonde woman” pushing the ballplayer with both hands, then slapping him in the face.
Furthermore, that “brief suspension” was for the entire 2014 season. And was assessed prior to and in addition to any action taken by local prosecutors.
Or are you just drawing the conclusions you’ve made here because the player in question is black?
I, uhh, have a confession. I was a male college student often inebriated. At one time or another, with my male colleagues, I voiced my superiority over minerals, animals, mammals, and finally, in a fit of rationality, myself.
So. . . . the boys were being vile? As bad as any rouge that ever lived?
Yes, these unattended just out of adolescence boys are really, really vile. I wonder just how widespread is the vileness? (sarc/off)
Women and queers won’t understand the glee that attends this adolescent rebellion, which is as necessary to pass through for a boy as a toddler learns how to potty.
It is not even conscious much less horrendous much less vile for drunk frat boys to vilify whatever happens to appear upon the public altar. What does appear is not substance or rationality, but vapidness and is celebrated for its vapor.
The boys know its wrong but that’s where the fun comes from and the thing is chosen for that value, not the racism. If there had been a present black person, another subject appearing–one after another on the altar–would have been chosen. Likely women, if that helps. Probably after women would be the dumb kid. Some participant, at this point, in too much identification, would suggest a totally personal thing, which would be rejected by the present court.
And so it goes that way. Year after year and generation after generation. We make fun of that which isn’t us when we are growing up and all of us should admit the urge is always there.
So, not vile or deplorable.
Understandable but now allowable.
Singing that kind of thing on a private bus calls for being grounded, after a VERY stern lecture, for the rest of the semester.
Not lynching.
And this whole thing reminds me of being in Whole Foods in NYC not too long ago and hearing this “music” on the store speakers:
I’ma gonna f*** dat b****up to her neck. . . .
. . . as the (largely white, many female) patrons obliviously pawed through the produce bins.
If we’re going to have ThoughtCrime (obviously we already do — for “crackahs”), then let’s make it even-steven. I don’t want to hear any misogynist, violent garbage from the rappers; I don’t want Calyso Louis Farrakhan to be allowed to make his white-hating, Jew-hating speeches; I don’t want to hear ANY of this crap.
One of the bad effects of this kind of differential enforcement (as all of you know) is that the kids get real cynical about it all. It actually creates race hostility, fuels it in the white kids (who can’t help but see that they’re the only ones being whipped) and encourages racism in minority kids as well: they get to feel superior and invulnerable now.
Very bad business all around.
Wade, you put it in perspective.
In other words, everyone needs to rewatch “Animal House” and cool their jets.
I still think a stern talking-to for the boys in question (including a major warning about cell phone videos dogging you for the rest of your life) plus some suspension of privileges would make the point about having more class and manners.
Truk grew up with the rest of the us
but he didn’t quite feel quite natural.
He wasn’t sure if it was his skin
or other things which got him scold.
Truk was entitled and determined
to fit in. Make himself something and
to give something bringing
in something to an empty bin.
Truk is in; he gathers us in;
we can’t live in in an empty bus.
Keasey’s gone; our throne is wrong
the whole thing’s a bust.
I like a good stern talking to. It’s . . . just . . . delightful.
Yes, it can can be. And should be. Any moral creature, according to liberal teaching, is only education away from beautiful behavior.
Of course, we know different. Stern talking is only effective when back up by stern punishment.
Discovery of ones’ supposed private indescretions, alone, is stern punishment. These boys will never have the life they had before this event.
And that is sad, because any sober adult happening upon drunk college frat boys with too much testosterone, would have easily popped their altar bubble and reminded them of their humanity. The fact that only horror movies relate incidents of the “horrible frat boys” should quell rising fears of the non-frat white boy populace. Never happens. Really. Never does.
But the passage of this narrow pass does teach a lesson. Soon, the immature college frat boys derive no pleasure in subordinate degradation. And they are all the stronger for having passed through a real test.
Who has proved most tolerant?
It was a remarkable experiment and appeared to be successful. What a shame that it failed.
My objection is testament to my commitment to free speech, and my understanding that the only way to achieve “zero tolerance for racism everywhere in the nation” would be by a stifling of liberty so Draconian as to amount to tyranny.
You indeed “get it”.
My husband was of the same mind as you, Neo. He was gong to twitter out as much from his 8000 follower feed, but me, being a nervous nelly asked him to pass. Today, when I found your post on this subject, I went to him and said, “here, Twitter this out. I was a wuss…” Anyway. my favorite thought crime, PC, hate speech story is this, you will appreciate it, being a former dancer. My daughter attended Mount Holyoke College. In high school – she had been a dancer, but she decided that was a hard row to hoe, so dancing became her hobby. She participated in the extra curricular dancing offered there. During her senior year, in 2008, I flew up to attend a lovely dance program put on by the school. It was several different dance vignettes, all done by student choreographers. There was one piece that featured three lovely girls of Chinese extraction. I loved it. It was delightful, captivating. So, afterward, when I took all of my daughter’s friends and boyfriends for a late super and drinks, when someone asked me which was my favorite (aside from my daughter’s of course) I said, “Oh! That lovely one performed by the oriental girls!” Well, if looks could have killed, I would have been dead on the spot. They all, to a girl and boy, informed me that I was being racist and horrid and that the word I should have used was “asian.” It was a very revealing evening. My daughter had to explain to all of her friends how I had meant no harm, that I had grown up using this word without any bigoted or racist intent. She said they all forgave me (lucky me) but it was a chilling lesson in free speech or the lack there of…
Schadenfreude, anyone? The overwrought response of OU immediately brought to mind the self righteous histrionics over Elvis Presley’s swiveling hips 60 years ago. So, I wonder if this is the pendulum swinging, generational déjé vu. It is ironic for the baby boomers to have their panties in a wad, given that they revered and embraced shock value and reveled in scatological and obscene discourse. Is it any surprise that the next generation would find this stuff funny and cute? Thanks, Black Entertainment Industry. I am not excusing this behavior, it’s just a reminder that the Boomer mentality prevailed, turned the public discourse hysterical and toxic, and diminished us all.
“One of the bad effects of this kind of differential enforcement (as all of you know) is that the kids get real cynical about it all. It actually creates race hostility, fuels it in the white kids (who can’t help but see that they’re the only ones being whipped) and encourages racism in minority kids as well: they get to feel superior and invulnerable now.”
Exactly. If you’re going to punish people for allegedly ‘racist’ speech, better ban with an even hand.
J.J.@11:31pm said,
“David Boren knew that there would be a fire storm, which would cost OU a ton of litigation money, good will, and football revenue.”
I do not get it. Who would litigate OU over the incident? On what basis?
“Good will”? Whose good will?
“Football revenue” I understand…it is primarily a black sport at the OU level and above. Can’t have the De’Juans backing out of their “commitment” letters.
Don Carlos: “Who would litigate OU over the incident?” Ben Crump, Al Sharpton, possibly the DOJ – that’s who. I may be wrong, but whenever there has been a highly publicized racial incident in the last few years, the DOJ, Crump, and Sharpton seem to show up. The DOJ because Holder wants to have a “conversation” about race. What he means by that seems to be that he intends to correct, through the weight of the DOJ, any racist actions he hears about. Crump and Sharpton are in it for the money. They are gadflies who want to be bought off. The best defense against the racial grievance industry is thought by intimidated WASPs to be swift, draconian action to show proper obeisance to the values of the race grievance industry.
“Whose good will?” That of the legions of black football players past and present. That of other university presidents. That of the liberal media who provide so much lucrative money for their football telecasts.
Neo, I completely agree with you.
We don’t know what will constitute “racist” today, tomorrow, or further in the future. Feature not a bug.
Apparently criticizing or disagreeing with Obama constitutes “racism” in the minds of a lot of people today. Being upset about a man who says he identifies as a woman in a fitness club’s Ladies locker room makes one a bigot. I don’t want random people in power to start punishing people for breaking such questionable examples of “hate speech.”
“I find the whole thing chilling. What’s next, thoughtcrime?
Neo, Neo, Neo……. Where have you been?? We have thought crime now. Have you never heard of “hate crimes”? The crime is more serious and punished more severely if you are thinking the wrong thing while committing it.
If I kill you because I think you are ugly and obnoxious, it’s a regular murder. If I kill you because you are an ugly and obnoxious homosexual, it’s a hate crime. It all depends on what I’m thinking and not at all upon my actual actions (killing you).
J.J.:
Extortion may involve threat of litigation, but it isn’t litigation yet.
Litigation needs at least a thin basis of fact, unless the plaintiff is DOJ. Sharpton and Jesse extort; legal extortion is their livelihood, as you well know.
Good will of black ballplayers matters little; most don’t graduate or make the big money, and there is a fresh crop every year. TV contract is with the Conference. not OU. But I agree with you that college and university presidents are in cahoots with one another as members of the Ruling Class.
I still get very upset when anyone burns our flag. How very outdated I am. This will never become illegal and I know a lot of people roll their eyes at this. Everyone has their own opinion and this is mine.
We ARE talking about ex-Senator David Boren are we not?
YIIKES.
“President David Boren is a former Democratic Senator, so you can’t expect him to understand the Constitution.”
ouch
In fairness to David Boren it’s hard to think of any of the current crop of Democratic Senators that would act any differently.
Don Carlos: “Good will of black ballplayers matters little; most don’t graduate or make the big money, and there is a fresh crop every year.”
That’s giving short shrift to those who do graduate and make good, such as J.C. Watts.
” TV contract is with the Conference. not OU. ” Do you think the conference won’t bring pressure to bear on OU as a result of media pressure on the conference? We are living in a media world that is on steroids when it comes to being PC.
One of my old fraternity brothers, Tom Brookshier, lost his job as a sports commentator when he made a joking, on-camera remark about the IQs of some basketball players, most of whom were black. That was in 1983. He did get his job back for a short time, but after that he was radioactive for the most part. The PC atmosphere has been building for a long time. Brookshier and Don Imus were allowed to get their jobs back after prostrating themselves before the God’s of the race grievance industry. But the punishments are becoming swifter and more draconian. At the same time, it is the same sort of thing that makes Obama unimpeachable, police departments guilty of racism while simply doing their jobs, and corporations paying protection money to the likes of Sharpton, Jackson, and Crump.
Can OU expel anyone who sings Communist Pete Seeger’s folk songs? I’d love to see universities expel anyone and everyone who utters Communist speech.
J.J. Says:
March 11th, 2015 at 4:45 pm
Do you think the conference won’t bring pressure to bear on OU as a result of media pressure on the conference? We are living in a media world that is on steroids when it comes to being PC.
Good point. Furthermore, it’s gone beyond simply firing those who say something offensive. Now sports fans can count on pre-game lectures from Bob Costas, or from any of a dozen talking heads on ESPN, as to everything from whether players (or owners) should be banned to whether teams should be forced to change their names or mascots.
I guess we all will be getting our cups of civil rights with two lumps of over-reaction & over-compensation for quite some time. There’s no point to discussing proportionate responses that envision an opportunity for offenders to make amends.
The body cannot heal until the Leftist rot and infection is cut away, permanently.