Blog #3 : Speech Theories

 

When I first saw I was assigned to write a blog on speech theories, I was filled with panic for I had no clue what it could even entail. Yet once I began to research, I realized how interesting the theories actually are. They are all written by scholars (all seeming to be law professors) who committed their studies to dissect aspects of the First Amendment. In all honesty, I would not be surprised if my professor had created a theory himself, for he is extremely knowledgeable of the First Amendment.  

The theory that resonated the most with me was developed by Lee Bollinger, who not only is a lawyer, but the 19th and still surviving president of Colombia University. His theory and book writing all stemmed from an incident that happened within a suburb of Chicago, Skokie Illinois. This community had a large Jewish population, very much like my own hometown. In 1977, a group of followers of the Nazi party had planned on parading through the community. These individuals had not been Nazis themselves, yet held the same beliefs of the party under Hitler’s ruling. Personally, I was shocked to learn about this case, for although I was raised Catholic I could not imagine an event like this occurring within my own hometown. This incident emerged as one of the largest First Amendment cases in the United States. The “neo-nazis” claimed that their protest was protected under their right of free speech, while the Jewish citizens of the town claimed to be under attack due to their religious beliefs. The American Civil Liberties Union were the ones to uphold the case, in which they defended the right to protest. Ultimately, the Nazis won the case in favor of the First Amendment, thus leaving a largely controversial case and ultimately no march within Skokie. 

This event left Bollinger to write his book The Tolerant Society, questioning the measures of the First Amendment. He named the incident of Skokie to be a form of extremist speech. Despite this extremely controversial matter, Bollinger gave insight into how it can help give a fuller understanding of the First Amendment. This theory seems to be the most important to me, for Bollinger’s interpretation of it makes the most reasonable sense.  When he tested his theory of the Skokie case, he came to the conclusion that all the judges on the case actually condemned Nazi beliefs, and yet still believed it was a right protected under the First Amendment.  His theory explains that the outcome of the Skokie case left the legal system with a sort of “tolerance” of the First Amendment. This ruling has created a sort of acceptance of extremism in terms of freedom of speech.  Bolinger also believes that all of society contains impulses of intolerance, for we do not want to stray from our own beliefs. Most people do not act on these impulses, but still may accept those individuals who do. 

Overall, I believe that Bollinger’s theory is somewhat similar to “cancel culture” today. There are no written rules for someone to be canceled, and personally I believe cancel culture goes against all aspects of the First Amendment. The problem with cancel culture is that it is not the government going against a person, yet others in society. This is similar to Bollinger’s theory, for there seems to be a tolerance present yet no written rules within cancel culture. People can be outed for all different statements, ranging from small to borderline extremism.