![]() The apparent failure of Stanford's leadership to apologize to the organizers and audience of the event suggests they do not fully understand what was so bad about last week's events. If the school fails to ensure these rights are protected, those in charge should apologize for that. Consistent with Stanford's policy, all student groups should be able to plan events at which they discuss issues of interest to their members, free of disruption from others. Dean Martinez and President Tessier-Lavigne (and the SLS administrators who sat idly by as the event was disrupted) should apologize to these students because it is these students-as members of the Stanford academic community-who were the primary victims of the school's failure to adhere to its own policy.Īs the text of Stanford's policy makes clear, the intended beneficiaries of the policy are members of the Stanford academic community (though it extends to "all individuals"), and it is the members of that community who are hurt most when the policy is not abided by. More than to Judge Duncan, an apology is owed to the student Federalist Society chapter and those who attended the event in the hopes of hearing Judge Duncan's remarks. The apology acknowledges this, and that's good. The school did not adhere to and enforce its own speech policy, and as a consequence Judge Duncan was not treated the way an invited speaker should be. How does this apply to the dust up at SLS? First, I think it indicates that it was perfectly appropriate for the Dean and President to apologize to Judge Duncan. And if two sides of a dispute both did wrong, then both should apologize. We should each be responsible and accountable for our own conduct. That "they did it first" or "they did it too" is not an excuse (as we should have all learned in grade school). If it was in response to something they did, perhaps they should apologize to you too. If you mistreat a bad person, you should apologize to them. ![]() Whether or not one should apologize has nothing to do with whether the person mistreated is worthy of an apology. It is about recognizing that one did not behave as one should and owning up to it. The purpose of an apology is to acknowledge and accept accountability for one's own actions (or inaction). ![]() Let's step back for a minute and think about the role of an apology. Some progressive groups and commentators objected to the apology, and suggested Dean Martinez should apologize to them. Over the weekend, Stanford Law School (SLS) Dean Jenny Martinez and Stanford President Marc Tessier-Lavigne apologized to Judge Kyle Duncan for the disruption of an event at which he was invited to speak at the law school.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |