The New Republic

" But I am doubly disappointed when they are Jewish. A minority in an overwhelmingly Christian countries, Jews ought always to be on the side of unpopular speech. If they can ban Khatami today, they can ban Kaufman tomorrow. And since when is taking offense a reason not to hear a politician from a country with whom we will some day have to engage diplomatically?" Alan Wolfe is a fine sociologist of religion, but his comments are not up to his usual intellectual standard. Free speech ought to be valued because it is a good in itself and not because it is good for minorities. Moreover, to value free speech mainly because it is good for minorities can lead to the paradoxical situation where speech can be used to demonize minorities creating an atmosphere of intolerance. I would rather say that free speech is a social good precisely because it allows for open debate. Stated in this way one can oppose Khatami's presence at Harvard and still allow his words to be published and today's world transmitted electronically to all who wish to hear it. The key point is that opposing Khatami's presence at Harvard is not a free speech issue. Rather it is an issue of endorsing (in this case by a private institution) or rejecting to endorse the views of a man who represents an intolerant and repressive regime. One can uphold the principle of free speech without endorsing the views of a speaker who himself rejects the principle of free speech. I support Kaufman's call not to allow Khatami to speak at Harvard. This is not the same as rejecting the principle of free speech.

- jacksondyer

September 7, 2006 at 11:30am

Neither is bin Laden -- or should we have him over for a discussion too? .

- purcellneil

September 7, 2006 at 1:27pm

Neither is bin Laden -- or should we have him over for a discussion too? At least then Bush would know where Osama is and might actually finish the job started in 2001.

- epackard

September 7, 2006 at 2:13pm

Do you think so? After Katrina, I am guessing the best Bush could do would be to fly over the University two days after the speech had been given...

- purcellneil

September 7, 2006 at 3:25pm

Osama bin Laden planning to speak at an American University. Think that briefing would get more of a reaction from Bush than the one that said OBL was going to attack America? .

- purcellneil

September 7, 2006 at 3:26pm

I don't see Harvard's invitation to Khatami as endorsing his views, particularly when unscripted questions are allowed; rather it's an expression of the courage of a free and open society to hear, respond, and contend with one whose opinions and viewpoints are rarely, if ever, challenged in person in a public arena. I hope those in the audience rise to the occasion and hold Khatami's intellectual feet to the fire.

- Jim Bush

September 7, 2006 at 3:28pm

Khatami is obviously a dirtbag, but it's no endorsement of him nor a promotion of him to hear him speak. It's not a therapy session. We are left in a pretty curious and scary position if we refuse to pay attention to what dangerous people who disagree with us are saying. It would be great if Iran was really simple to understand and we didn't have to give it much mind - but I don't think this is the case.

- bstahlbe

September 7, 2006 at 3:46pm