When It Comes To Free Speech, Harvard Students Must Look Inward

Free speech is under attack at Harvard, but the culprit is not who some national rankings would have you believe it to be.

According to the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, Harvard’s “Abysmal” speech climate lies in rescinded college acceptances for racist remarks and disinvited anti-trans pundits. Conservative students cite a culture of censorship, fearing their opinions will be rejected by a liberal campus.

Institutionally, certain views are given an audience by University and the federal administration while others are stifled and silenced, especially those that challenge existing power structures. There is well-documented suppression of pro-Palestine speech at Harvard; the Trump administration has placed federal funding ultimatums on DEI initiatives at universities across America.

Others have blamed the University’s free speech woes on their protesting peers and Crimson staff editorials. Yet as a survey of the Class of 2024 demonstrated, much of the censorship on our campus is self-imposed; most respondents express fears of criticism or being seen as offensive. However, self-censorship is a choice and one that we as a student body must reject.

When it comes to fear of the “woke” boogeyman, it is time to call a spade a spade. Fear of criticism or “cancellation” only fosters the lack of dialogue that plagues our campus.

To those living with this fear: If you believe in something and have reasons to believe in it, your silence disservices both yourself and your peers. Even mere curiosity about an idea generates discussion and, potentially, productive disagreement. In the event of strong and possibly hostile pushback, fear should not stop you from expressing opinions you are passionate about or questions you wish to explore.

Is social tension — or even ostracization — so unbearable that it is better to be unheard altogether? If you allow the difficulties of disagreement and interpersonal conflict to outweigh your values, you miss out on the vast diversity of opinions that can be found and engaged with at Harvard.

Self-censorship is not, as some critics claim, a result of Harvard being an inherently unnavigable echo chamber. Rather, our fear of saying what we think is, in part, a reflection of the declining social skills of a post-Covid-19 society. A study of nearly 1,700 freshmen at liberal arts colleges found their social-emotional skills had plummeted in the wake of the pandemic; dodging political debate may just be a symptom of that.

Indeed, the Covid-19 pandemic — and subsequent global lockdown — isolated today’s young adults, allowing us to avoid interpersonal conflict during our most formative years. Political disagreement, especially with the divisive nature of political content often found online, appears more frightening than ever. Avoiding it may be enticing — but the results are disastrous.

We need to rebuild a sense of mutual trust in each other and speak from a position of respect. This is impossible unless we start talking to each other, as scary as that may sometimes seem. Echo chambers form and political polarization worsens when discussion across ideologies is not had.

The question of how the University can best facilitate free expression has been hotly debated these past few years. Regardless of what initiatives, panels, or programs may be successful, we as a student body are complicit if we choose to remain silent and intellectually distant from each other. The plethora of ideas, backgrounds, and thoughts at Harvard is unparalleled. Most students now seem too nervous to take advantage of it — that is a shame.

Many of my deepest friendships at Harvard have been formed and strengthened through meaningful disagreement, even on sensitive topics. Take a risk! If someone is not willing to listen, make that their problem, not yours.

It’s time we all grow up a little and stop living in fear of expressing our views. If Harvard is to value free speech, it starts with all of us.

Adam N. Chiocco ’27, a Crimson Editorial comper, is a double concentrator in Philosophy and Government in Pforzheimer House.