Get Access to Print and Digital for $23.99. The restriction of debate, whether by a repressive government or an intolerant society, invariably hurts those who lack power and makes everyone less capable of democratic participation. We need to preserve the possibility of good-faith disagreement without dire professional consequences. The intellectual freedom of cis white intellectuals has never been under threat en masse, especially when compared to how writers from marginalized groups have been treated for generations. Our cultural institutions are facing a moment of trial. The problem they are describing is for the most part a rare one for privileged writers, but it is constant for the voices that have been most often shut out of the room. Absolutely vile and everyone who signed this letter endorsing the smear of him should be ashamed of themselves. We need to preserve the possibility of good-faith disagreement without dire professional consequences. “A Letter on Justice and Open Debate” appeared on the website of Harper’s Magazine on July 7, 2020, and will appear in the letters section of the magazine’s October issue.

Editors are fired for running controversial pieces; books are withdrawn for alleged inauthenticity; journalists are barred from writing on certain topics; professors are investigated for quoting works of literature in class; a researcher is fired for circulating a peer-reviewed academic study; and the heads of organizations are ousted for what are sometimes just clumsy mistakes. And why now? The free exchange of information and ideas, the lifeblood of a liberal society, is daily becoming more constricted. The document is titled: This stifling atmosphere will ultimately harm the most vital causes of our time. Institutions are listed for identification purposes only. As writers we need a culture that leaves us room for experimentation, risk taking, and even mistakes. Harper's Magazine, July 7, 2020 . And whatever happened to do unto others? If you say or do anything that is not part of the masses you fear retaliation. Powerful protests for racial and social justice are leading to overdue demands for police reform, along with wider calls for greater equality and inclusion across our society, not least in higher education, journalism, philanthropy, and the arts. They come from the perspective of someone from a mixed race background who believes in a anti racial philosophy not that dissimilar to that of Barack Obama's. On July 7, Harper’s published “A Letter on Justice and Open Debate,” which was signed by a diverse body of writers and public intellectuals. In this article, the National Review is lending its voice in support of its long time gadfly Matthew Yglesias, who is taking fire from the Woke brigade as a result of signing the Harper’s Letter. The signatories claim that “journalists are barred from writing on certain topics.”Here, they could be talking about how just last month, at theThe signatories claim that “professors are investigated for quoting works of literature in class.” This could be a reference to The signatories claim that a researcher was “fired for circulating a peer-reviewed academic study.” This is likely about David Shor, who tweeted a summary of The signatories claim that “the heads of organizations are ousted for what are sometimes just clumsy mistakes.” This is so vague that it seems hard to pick out a specific example, although in Not only is there no significant evidence of inappropriate censure linking these instances, it’s unclear what examples the authors, some of whom are considered writing icons, are even drawing from to make their point. We refuse any false choice between justice and freedom, which cannot exist without each other. But it is now all too common to hear calls for swift and severe retribution in response to perceived transgressions of speech and thought. Erich lives in the Shaw Neighborhood of St. Louis, Missouri with his two daughters. We are now beginning to hear the other side of a much-needed debate advocating for the need for robust and open debate. One invited professor, who did not sign the Under the guise of free speech and free exchange of ideas, the letter appears to be asking for unrestricted freedom to espouse their points of view free from consequence or criticism. And though the Right is the primary recipient of cancelling, if *anyone* does not toe the ever-changing neo-progressive orthodoxy of the day, they become a target as well. Here’s the letter: A Letter on Justice and Open Debate. We refuse any false choice between justice and freedom, which cannot exist without each other. As writers we need a culture that leaves us room for experimentation, risk taking, and even mistakes. “A Letter on Justice and Open Debate” has just been published online in Harper’s. This letter was a group effort, started by journalists of color with contributions from the larger journalism, academic, and publishing community.

Here is the final paragraph of the Harper’s Letter signed by numerous artists, thinkers and writers who fear for the future. Our cultural institutions are facing a moment of trial. Whatever the arguments around each particular incident, the result has been to steadily narrow the boundaries of what can be said without the threat of reprisal. The training does appear to fail the Compelled Speech test, and should be banned…In 1970 I had the wholly-unearned privilege of having dinner with Cannonball Add…I suspect that you did not listen to the podcast. Editors are fired for running controversial pieces; books are withdrawn for alleged inauthenticity; journalists are barred from writing on certain topics; professors are investigated for quoting works of literature in class; a researcher is fired for circulating a peer-reviewed academic study; and the heads of organizations are ousted for what are sometimes just clumsy mistakes. We uphold the value of robust and even caustic counter-speech from all quarters. And let’s assume that your opinion had nothing to do with your personal employment.