By Dr. Robert W. Velez, Lecturer II, UTRGV Department of Political Science
11/14/23
Higher education has always been a place of open dialogue and the free exchange of ideas. Since time immemorial, the university campus has been a place where students AND faculty can let their imaginations run wild. It is the university campus that is largely responsible for major scientific discoveries and the development of theories that explain the things we see in society. The protests of the 1960’s brought social activism to the forefront of American politics by beaming images of the Vietnam War and Civil Rights protests into the living rooms of Americans who could no longer ignore the social struggles being negotiated in the mid-20th century. Much of this activism took place on university campuses around the country and the world.
These days, unfortunately, the campus is no longer a central location for us to engage in the ‘marketplace of ideas’. “Free speech ‘zones’” restrict protest to areas out of the line of sight and hearing of those who might be made to feel uncomfortable (read: elected officials and university administrators). Invited speakers are shouted down by angry and (apparently) not-fully-informed students in their attempt to ‘cancel’ the speaker. Sometimes faculty join students in their suppression of speech with which they disagree or find offense.
Look, some speech SHOULD be restricted. While our Bill of Rights provides for a slate of civil liberties, none of our rights are absolute. There are restrictions on ALL of them. There’s no requirement for a university or any venue to provide space for agents of chaos or opinion entrepreneurs whose sole focus is to agitate with racist, misogynistic, or bigoted rhetoric. Those instances of speech appropriately rejected or restricted should be the extreme exception though, NOT the rule.
However, a new specter is rearing its head on campus. Attempts to disrupt legitimate discourse necessary for a free people to govern themselves are afoot. This is not a hypothetical situation for UTRGV either.
On October 20th, I along with several of my faculty colleagues put together a panel to present information on the indictments the former president, Donald J. Trump is facing. In four separate jurisdictions, grand juries returned indictments against the former president on 91 felony criminal counts. I tell my students that we are witnesses to history. No president (in the U.S.) has ever been charged with one felony, let alone 91 of them. Of course, Trump is innocent until proven guilty.
Where else BUT the university campus should issues related to these criminal trials be discussed? Political scientists are indeed a squirrely bunch, but we know politics and the law. It was our intention to provide FACTUAL information about the cases (rather than what you might see on your Twitter feed or YouTube) and field questions from students, faculty, and staff as well as members of the public with an interest in this situation. In truth, ALL Americans SHOULD be interested in this topic since it goes right to the very heart of American Democracy.
In the lead up to the panel, we posted flyers, sent emails, and notified our students and colleagues about the event. As we normally do, we wanted to make sure that students and others in Brownsville had the opportunity to participate, so we created a ZOOM event to allow for virtual attendance and participation. The meeting’s ZOOM details were not shared publicly on our flyers or advertisements since
it was an accommodation for Brownsville rather than something we wanted to make available to the entire Internet. The first emails announcing the event went out Monday, October 9th at 4:03pm. At 4:07pm that same day, the administrative assistant for our department and the president of the UTRGV Political Science Association received the following email from a UTRGV student (name withheld):
“This is what you call election interference. It’s a game plan for the Biden administration to cover up him and his son with their overseas deals. This is bogus.”
Four minutes. That’s all it took for one UTRGV student obviously under the spell of the former president to pipe up and decry our effort to create a public space for discussion. As a veteran of realpolitik, I know that for everyone who makes the effort to communicate a political complaint there are likely dozens more who feel the same way, but never bother to make their opinions known. While we should always utilize our critical thinking skills, to intentionally and maliciously mischaracterize our efforts showed me precisely why we needed to have the panel in the first place.
It shouldn’t need to be said, but I assure you that the faculty of the political science department at UTRGV are NOT in league with President Biden or his campaign. Many of us are openly critical of the current president as well as previous presidents and politicians of ALL political stripes. In fact, I would argue that we are MORE critical of our elected officials than the average voter.
If you’ve seen the front page of The Rider’s November 6th edition, you know what happened next. Someone “Zoombombed” our panel, took over the ZOOM room and began broadcasting a horrific, despicable terrorist video. While the incident remains under investigation, I think it is safe to assume this was not a random incursion. Someone intentionally and with nefarious intent disrupted our attempt to engage with students and the community on an issue of political import. While myself and my colleagues are familiar with the darker side of political activism, it is unfortunate that the individual or individuals who engaged in this act of political terrorism – and make no mistake, that’s what it was – victimized the students and other participants. For all the talk of how conservatives are silenced on campuses around the country, this is an example of the ACTUAL threat on today’s campuses: any attempt to criticize the former president is treated as an attempt to harm his political fortunes. If facts and the discussion of same harm Donald J. Trump’s political fortunes, then so be it. That is NOT “election interference”. That is making sure that voters get the information they need to make an informed choice. I’ll never shrink from my role in making sure that happens.
“Editor’s note: Dr. Robert W. Velez is the faculty adviser for Vaquero Radio”
