Speakers should spark worthy discussions, not false ideas

On Tuesday, MSU’s Young Americans for Freedom brought a self-proclaimed reformed terrorist named Walid Shoebat to campus. In my opinion, bringing such controversial speakers often causes the free speech debate to resurface. While the right to free speech should be protected and promoted, especially in an academic climate, it is critical to allow all viewpoints into the discussion, and the incredibly important implications of such inflammatory speech rarely are considered.

In this instance, the content of the Shoebat speech promotes a tense climate on campus that doesn’t foster learning. Making such blanket statements as, “the Muslim community doesn’t condemn terrorism,” establishes a university atmosphere that is detrimental to all students because it promotes completely unfounded suspicion toward others. Instead of bringing speakers who adversely contribute to MSU in this way, it would be infinitely more beneficial to foster true academic discussion. This could be achieved by inviting speakers who are highly qualified to speak on such topics and to use precise language when doing so.

Instead, Shoebat’s rhetoric essentialized large groups of people, and in doing so, is counterproductive at truly addressing a legitimate concern regarding the safety of American lives because it marginalizes mainstream voices. As students at MSU, we must be aware of the implications of the presence of speakers like Shoebat on our campus. Such events should encourage us to overcome such hostility by constantly striving for a more inclusive community.

Nada Zohdy

international relations and comparative cultures and politics sophomore