Our campus is a snapshot of the future of this nation’s politics, and the tactics that may be employed by social justice warriors over the next decade were on full display at Tuesday’s protest against the event “Feminism is Cancer.”
Bruin Republicans hosted Milo Yiannopoulos, technology editor for the conservative news and opinion website Breitbart.com, in the Broad Art Center, where they estimated that more than 400 supporters showed up to listen to him talk. They were greeted at the door by a contingent of roughly 50 protesters who blocked the entrance, screamed at the supporters, blasted music and demanded that the event be shut down.
The ideology that I saw represented Tuesday by the protesters is one that considers, as one protester put it, “neutrality as violence.” In other words, if you don’t wholeheartedly support their cause, with no misgivings, you are part of a violent and oppressive system. In fact, in my attempt to get comments from the protesters, I was met with repeated refusals for comment. The only comments I was able to get were from students Troy Robinson, who wanted to be quoted as only saying, “this is f—— asinine,” and Aidan Casey, who asked for his only statement to be “the Patriarchy exists.”
I then approached some protesters that were off to the side under a long banner, and was met with a little more substance from Chanel Mozer, who works with LA Femmes of Color Collective. She said, “We’re putting our foot down. I’ve seen his videos, and nothing he says has sources, it’s just hate speech.” It’s undeniable that Yiannopoulos makes many unsubstantiated claims, but labeling everything he has to say as “hate speech” could be perceived by the other side as just using a buzzword to avoid discussing the issue.
On the other side, a sea of red “Make America Great Again” hats represented the Republicans. Jake Strumfell, a Trump supporter, said that the protest was “counter to free speech,” and that he had come to the event “to push back against the safe space culture.” I was able to obtain a one-on-one interview with Yiannopoulos, himself a fervent Trump supporter, and the Bruin Republicans incoming external vice president, Haley Nieves. They both pointed out that the “Trump phenomenon” is a direct reaction to the rhetoric being espoused on the side of the feminist supporters.
Almost every supporter I spoke to repeated these statements against outrage culture and social justice, lending weight to the argument from Nieves and Yiannopoulos. These young men, along with many others across the country, feel they are no longer allowed to debate certain topics and that free speech is threatened on college campuses. So when these young men see someone like Donald Trump oppose political correctness, they see someone who represents them, and their desire for an intellectually diverse and open atmosphere.
The protest on Tuesday was reminiscent of protests at Mizzou, Wesleyan and especially Yale in 2015. The Mizzou and Wesleyan protests focused on issues of race, whereas Yale’s was over Halloween costumes and cultural appropriation. All were scary to anyone in favor of the First Amendment. Two faculty members were pressured to resign at Yale (and eventually did) because they voiced an unpopular opinion: that college students should wear whatever they like during Halloween. This is an opinion that is eminently defensible and should be allowed to be voiced on college campuses without fear of censorship or punishment.
The same can be said of the unpopular opinion that feminism no longer has a central place in the developed world. Christina Hoff Sommers, The American Enterprise Institute, The Economist, U.S. News and The Guardian have all published articles deconstructing some popular feminist myths and that describe the massive successes feminists have already won. It should be no surprise that 82 percent of Americans don’t consider themselves feminists. Feminism still has some valuable fights to wage, but the vast majority of Americans simply don’t experience the patriarchy to a sufficient extent in their daily lives for it to still be legitimately considered a major issue.
What they do experience, however, is economic strife and inequality not seen since the Great Depression, as I outlined in my previous opinion piece. The economics are clearly in support for more taxation on the super rich and more regulation on global capital flow. Donald Trump’s success is certainly a reaction to this horrific economic situation, evidenced by his repeated claim that he will “bring jobs back to America.”
By focusing their efforts on feminism, instead of the underlying economic factors at play, to challenge Trump’s rise, the protesters simply succeeded in galvanizing his support. When it has been made perfectly clear that a specific ideology wishes to be totalitarian and that it will accept no challenges, it is difficult for those who want to have an open debate to accept that ideology.
These activists are obviously left-leaning and have become the vocal minority of the Democratic Party, especially on college campuses. This is damaging to democracy because the opposition, usually right-leaning, is able to avoid all criticism simply by representing itself with demagogic minorities like Yiannopoulos, who is gay himself. This allows them to dodge such attacks as “anti-gay” and “racist”, which I repeatedly heard from the protesters. If everything the left-leaning contingent of UCLA has to offer up against Trump and the new anti-political correctness movement he represents are ad-hominem attacks and censorship, then they’ve already lost.
Economic measures usually associated with left-leaning politics are urgently needed in our country. But they will not be taken seriously if liberals continue to allow themselves to be represented by groups of protesters like those present on Tuesday. They need to engage in stoic, fact-based discussion if they are to stave off the rise of far-right demagogues who rely on our current censorial climate to succeed both here and in Europe.
Thanks for sharing your perspective and experience.
Wouldn’t exactly describe a sea of Trump supporters aggressively storming a building screaming “Build the wall!” as “neutral” or “stoic”. Men are rational adults and women are hysterical children who need to learn to sit down and shut up? Haven’t heard that one before!
Anyone who tries to “shut down” an event so that a speaker cannot communicate with an audience that desires to hear him or her speak is an anti free speech fascist plain and simple. It does not matter what message the speaker is articulating. Don’t like the content of the speech, organize a counter event or try and get the speaker to agree to a debate with you.