Letter to the editor of the Daily Princetonian

September 20, 2023 1 min read

1 Comment

Matthew Wilson and Alba Bajri
Daily Princetonian

Excerpt: To the Editor:

On Sept. 17, The Daily Princetonian published an article by Aidan Gouley ’27 entitled “Princetonians must invest in the marketplace of ideas.” The author calls on students to “situat[e] free expression in a liberal context,” claiming that “the debate on free expression at Princeton has been co-opted by campus conservatives” while slandering principled and nonpartisan free speech advocacy as “toxic and polarizing.”

Gouley’s allegation that conservative students have “co-opted” the free speech debate is an oft-regurgitated and thoroughly debunked trope. Articles leveling the same meritless argument have a lengthy history of appearing in the pages of this publication — and have been amply refuted. Gouley calls on students “to create an environment of learning for all in the natural exchange of individual ideas and experiences that both includes and simultaneously transcends the political.” But absentminded complaining about the co-option of the free speech issue by conservative students — the so-called “ideologues” making “overbroad claims about the ideological slant of the University” — does not help “bridge the political divide,” nor does it promote the free exchange of ideas.

Gouley’s assertion that “Princeton hardly feels like an institution where free speech is directly under attack” betrays a painful lack of awareness of the real problems facing our University.

Click here for link to full letter


1 Response

Doug Hensler ‘69
Doug Hensler ‘69

October 12, 2023

Wilson and Bajri give Gouley far too much credit for reasoned and critical thought. Gouley’s opinion piece is rife with self-contradictory opines and internal inconsistency. We’ll give Gouley the benefit of the doubt attached to being a freshman fresh off his high school indoctrination. We look forward to Gouley’s opinion in 44 months, the university’s prejudice against “old white men” notwithstanding.

Leave a comment


Also in Princeton Free Speech News & Commentary

Commentary: ‘How to Prosecute Genocide?’ panel hosted by Lichtenstein Institute for Self-Determination

November 21, 2024 1 min read

Leela Hensler
Daily Princetonian

Excerpt: On Tuesday, Nov. 19, Princeton students and faculty filled the lower level of McCosh 50 to hear Professor Luis Moreno Ocampo, who is the first chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC), and Anoush Baghdassarian, who currently serves as a clerk on the U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals, discuss the ICC’s role in securing justice for victims of genocide on a global scale. This scope includes conflicts which have been the focus of student activism, such as wars in Ukraine and Gaza.
Read More
Commentary: We must dispel the myth of Princeton’s economic diversity

November 21, 2024 1 min read

Raf Basas
Daily Princetonian

Excerpt: At Princeton, we often forget the sharp difference in income distributions between Princeton and the nation as a whole. The media spins a tale of great improvement: Though Princeton had once predominantly served America’s economic elite, it has done well in shedding the specter of affluence that has haunted it for centuries. After all, a whopping 65 percent of Princeton students receive some level of financial aid.

This is a persuasive narrative, but make no mistake: Princeton’s “economic diversity” is a myth. Although the numbers have improved since the 2017 article from The New York Times, just 30.8 percent of Princeton’s Class of 2026 is from the bottom 60 percent of U.S. households.
Read More
Commentary: Princeton’s liberal hypocrisy will only exacerbate the post-election political divide

November 21, 2024 1 min read

Siyeon Lee and Genevieve Shutt
Daily Princetonian

Excerpt: A coalition of Princeton’s liberal and progressive organizations hosted a ‘Walkout For Our Futures’ last Friday, in response to Donald Trump’s victory in the US presidential election. Like many others, we were fearful, dejected, and most of all, angry — and understandably, sought to make this sentiment known. This anger, however, was expressed by some protestors in a manner that was not only unproductive but also incendiary.

What democratic, egalitarian, or progressive purpose is served by ascribing idiocy to all of Trump’s administration — or by fantasizing about its failure? When progressives reduce Trump and his administration to incendiary insults, often attacking their intelligence and capability, his largely working-class, non-college-educated followers likely translate those insults as their own.
Read More