cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/15790262
How campus protests flip-flopped Americaās free speech debate [Colin Meyn | 05/25/24 | The Hill]
The battle lines over free speech on college campuses were largely entrenched before pro-Palestinian encampments rapidly spread across the country last month.
This left conservative voices on campus and in Congress positioning themselves as the defenders of free speech and, somewhat paradoxically, champions of liberal values around the need for open debate in Americaās bastions of higher learning.
In recent months, however, House hearings about college campuses have focused instead on various ways to suppress speech deemed antisemitic or āpro-Hamasā ā as protesters rail against U.S. support for Israelās war in Gaza, as well as the Zionist movement they blame for the historical oppression of Palestinians.
āFor a decade, conservatives have been crying foul on that,ā Morey said of curbing free speech. āUntil you get to post-October 7. And now people are saying āFrom the river to the seaā or āIntifadaā or āFree Gazaā ā and a certain crop of conservatives donāt like that. And now suddenly, we have found their free speech limit. They donāt really mean āfree speech,ā they mean āfree speech until itās speech I donāt like.āā
Lawler said slogans such as āFrom the river to the seaā were clearly antisemitic threats that should not be allowed. But Rep. Nicole Malliotakis (R-N.Y.), who has also proposed legislation to crack down on anti-Jewish hate speech, said such slogans were protected in her view.
āWeāve seen Jewish students in the encampments who held Shabbat services and Passover Seders with their peers,ā said Beth Miller, political director at Jewish Voice for Peace Action, which has helped organize cease-fire protests. āIt is not antisemitic to criticize the Israeli government or to protest complicity in genocide.ā
āThereās not an armed insurrection where one side is seeking to overthrow another and engages in any means necessary. This is a protest on a college campus in the United States of America. I think itās entirely possible to proceed with oneās objectives without crossing the line into rhetoric that is either dangerous or antisemitic.ā
Any mass movement that has a point of view that runs contrary to the desires of the capital class is a threat to their control. I mean that seems self evident.
Obviously. But thatās not an answer.
My question is: what are the concrete desires of the capital class that are being threatened?
Someone else said āoilā which is fair I guess, but very clearly a diminishing return when itās clear that energy independence is valuable for the capital class if they control the transition, a la Elon.
So again, what do the wealthy have to gain or lose from these protests, specifically?