A Far More Friendly Forum

Fifteen-hundred dead because of what you did!” This and other jeers were thrown at Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas J. Feith ’75 as he spoke at an Institute of Politics (IOP) Forum on March 3. The contentious nature at the Forum was not at all surprising given that Feith was defending the war in Iraq, and he was undoubtedly prepared for this. But the heckling Feith received from some audience members went beyond asking tough questions and showed a complete lack of decorum. Such behavior is simply unacceptable.

The Forum is a chance for politicians or experts to express their opinions and then have their viewpoints questioned in a hard but polite manner. At the same time, the IOP needs to ensure that speakers are challenged during the question session—which some claim Feith was not—and it should tweak the question-and-answer format in order to achieve this goal.

The Forum gives Harvard students the incredible opportunity to hear the world’s policy-makers in person and then question them on their positions. Few colleges give their students this kind of access to politicians, and Harvard students should be mindful of the fact that they have this privilege. Audience members must be courteous to speakers and allow them to talk without interjections. This, of course, does not mean that when given the chance to grill speakers, students should be deferential. They should pose difficult questions, but they should do so in a way that is both strong and respectful.

It should be said that the behavior at the Forum when Feith spoke was neither unique nor the most egregious example of poor behavior. Last year, Ralph Nader was unduly derided throughout a speech he gave at the Forum. This in no way excuses the actions of those who behaved abysmally when Feith spoke; rather, given the experience with Nader and previous speakers, the IOP should have been forewarned of what was coming. Furthermore, many students came away from Feith’s speech frustrated because they believed he had faced softball questions, and this certainly contributed to the unruly atmosphere at the Forum.

When the IOP knows that a particularly controversial person is coming to speak, they should randomize the question-asking process. One way this could be done is by distributing a limited number of question tickets to audience members at random. The ticket-holder would be allowed to ask a question, and if he or she did not have one, they could pass the ticket to someone who did. This would help ensure diversity among the questions. The IOP should also give the Harvard College Democrats and the Harvard College Republicans one to two questions as a group, guaranteeing the speaker will be challenged.

While there are certain limitations to these procedures, it is far better than the current survival-of-the-fittest system. If adopted, these procedures would bring much needed civility to the Forum, and would still allow future events to be stimulating and debate-filled.