Back in July 2023, when RFK Jr was still seeking the Democratic presidential nomination, I wrote a post evaluating his candidacy and claims. Yves Smith at Naked Capitalism occasionally reposts my articles in full (with a link back to the original source) and did so
Thank you again Rajiv for your thoughtful post. This is an important topic and I always value your measured response.
I'm afraid that the narrative is worse than what you describe. The narrative isn't "free speech is under siege in America", it's that "free speech is under siege in America and Academia is leading the charge!"
To buttress this point, they may cite incidents like the sanctioning of Kit Parker or Roland Fryer, or revoking Kyle Kashuv's acceptance after private messages were leaked, or the Lawrence Bacow disruption, or the Judge Duncan deplatforming (aided and abetted by administration), or... well you get the idea. They may also share surveys from the Knight Foundation, letters from the ACLU, articles in the Atlantic and the NYTimes, all of which take note of the censorious attitude that reigns in academia. Stanford hosts the Internet Observatory and has been partnering with DHS and a slew of NGOs, foreign and domestic, to censor.
Are you concerned that coding these facts as a "narrative" itself feeds into the narrative that free speech is not only under assault, but that academia is leading the charge given your own position? It seems dismissive and more likely to drive people to outsiders like Kennedy Jr as the incumbents seem unable to acknowledge the problem, never mind address it.
Thank you again Rajiv for your thoughtful post. This is an important topic and I always value your measured response.
I'm afraid that the narrative is worse than what you describe. The narrative isn't "free speech is under siege in America", it's that "free speech is under siege in America and Academia is leading the charge!"
To buttress this point, they may cite incidents like the sanctioning of Kit Parker or Roland Fryer, or revoking Kyle Kashuv's acceptance after private messages were leaked, or the Lawrence Bacow disruption, or the Judge Duncan deplatforming (aided and abetted by administration), or... well you get the idea. They may also share surveys from the Knight Foundation, letters from the ACLU, articles in the Atlantic and the NYTimes, all of which take note of the censorious attitude that reigns in academia. Stanford hosts the Internet Observatory and has been partnering with DHS and a slew of NGOs, foreign and domestic, to censor.
Are you concerned that coding these facts as a "narrative" itself feeds into the narrative that free speech is not only under assault, but that academia is leading the charge given your own position? It seems dismissive and more likely to drive people to outsiders like Kennedy Jr as the incumbents seem unable to acknowledge the problem, never mind address it.