Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

The attack on Salman Rushdie and freedom of expression

News

The attack on Salman Rushdie and freedom of expression
Getty Images

Savenor serves as the Executive Director of Civic Spirit.

At a session that was supposed to address freedom of expression in our fractured world, Salman Rushdie and moderator Henry Reese were brutally attacked. August 12, 2022, was not the day any of us at Chautauqua Institution expected.


I was in the audience on the day of the attack. My five seconds of footage of the attack posted on Twitter went viral.

Our experience tragically morphed into something surreal and horrific immediately after Rushdie and the moderator took their seats to great applause. A man jumped on the stage and began pummeling Mr. Rushdie. With every vicious movement of the assailant’s arm, silence descended on this usually pacifist community of learners.

For 150 years, Chautauqua Institution in the northwest corner of New York state has developed a reputation as a forum for convening conversations about big ideas and wrestling with assumptions, all in the hopes of making contemporary society and our shared future stronger and more secure. Chautauqua personifies Mr. Rushdie’s view that, “A mature society understands that at the heart of democracy is argument.”

I attended this event not just for my own edification but also because it connects to my work at Civic Spirit, an organization that provides training in civic education for the 4.5 million students who attend faith based day schools - Jewish, Catholic, Christian, and Islamic – in the United States.

You can imagine my dismay by the irony that the session devoted to freedom of speech was abruptly canceled by an attack on the speaker. Later that day we walked over to the amphitheater, where a pile of flowers, placards of hope and a candle filled the entrance that had been closed since the attack. Watching the maintenance team scrub blood off the stage, I gasped at the realization that this platform for inspiration and wisdom had been transformed into a crime scene.

I was in New York for 9/11. I was in Israel in 2002 when daily bombings killed scores of innocent civilians. And now this.

Truth be told, doubt overcame me. How can we talk about building bridges across differences when some among us will go to great lengths - and literally drive hundreds of miles - to assault and silence those with whom they disagree? Can our social contract withstand this relentless trauma?

The night after Mr. Rushdie’s attack we returned to the amphitheater to witness its reopening. The president of Chautauqua Institution, Michael E. Hill, framed the moment: “We are called to take on fear and the worst of all human traits – hate... The response must be love, of course, but also action. We must return to our podiums and pulpits. We must continue to convene the critical conversations that can help build empathy; obviously, this is more important now than ever.”

These words laced with purpose, confidence, and resilience offered this community a way forward, myself included. I needed to be reminded that with a growing sense of helplessness and hopelessness among today’s youth, civic education – and hope itself -constitutes a constructive course of action. At this polarized moment with hate crimes on the rise, it is vital that we not only ensure that our faith based day schools focus on civics, but also students, teachers, and administrators are supported in this endeavor at their families’ kitchen tables and spiritual leaders’ pulpits.

At Chautauqua, we expected to learn how our society can encourage and support open dialogue and foster understanding across divides. Sadly what we witnessed was a violation of the fundamental values of the Institution and America itself. This attack reinforced that we can never take the open exchange of ideas for granted.

Sadly, the attack on Mr. Rushdie last year is not an isolated event. News around the country of speakers being canceled for sharing different opinions, assaults on elected officials and their families, and attacks on those with different backgrounds showcase that this conflict has unfortunately become a part of American life. The sobering truth is, we can never take the open exchange of ideas for granted.

On that beautiful summer day, Mr. Rushdie lost sight in one eye and the use of one hand. While Mr. Rushdie did not get the chance to speak on that summer day, his unfailing commitment to free speech and vision for a healthy democracy continue to guide and inspire.


Read More

Members of a women's softball team cheerfully join hands during practice on a sunny day, showcasing team spirit, cooperation, and enthusiasm for the sport.

Do trans women have a strength advantage? A look at studies on hormone therapy, muscle mass, and why it should determine eligibility in women's sports.

luza studios/Getty Images

Trans Females Are Not Biological Males - Let Them Play on Female Teams

Most Americans, Democrats as well as Republicans—many following the lead of President Trump—feel that it is not right for trans females to participate in women's sports. But the trans community, supported by those on the left wing of the Democratic Party, insists that this is part of ensuring the rights of trans people. The issue has been divisive among Democrats.

This is a complex issue. On the one hand, boys are boys, and girls are girls. That's the basic fact behind male and female sports, other than some intramural school sports that have boys and girls on the same team. Because boys are biologically stronger and faster than girls, separate leagues have been developed for both. This has nothing to do with gender identity; it is just a reflection of biological fact.

Keep ReadingShow less
An aerial view of a Flock camera

An aerial view of a Flock camera in Burbank, California. U.S. President Donald Trump expressed support for Flock cameras, saying he likes the AI-powered surveillance technology because of its use by law enforcement, despite concerns that it infringes on privacy.

(Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)

Flock Cameras Are Coming Down – but We Need More To Dismantle the Surveillance State

Chances are, you’ve seen one in your neighborhood. Flock cameras have become a major flashpoint for voters in the leadup to the midterms. The concept sounds straight out of 1984 — a network of government-owned cameras that track your movements — it’s no wonder that Americans across party lines are demanding their states and towns sever ties with the controversial company. Surveillance fears are only getting stronger as we enter the AI era.

But the problem isn’t just Flock. These cameras, Automated License Plate Readers or ALPRs to be exact, are a symptom of a larger “surveil first, ask questions later” attitude that has been adopted by local and federal government for decades. In recent years, the federal government has been dramatically expanding the nation’s surveillance infrastructure. This has taken many forms, from facial recognition technology at the airport, to law enforcement monitoring your mail, to the government watching what you’re posting on your personal social media pages. Since April, many Democrats and Republicans in Congress have united to stop what would effectively be a blank check for surveillance via FISA reauthorization, demanding surveillance reforms such as closing the “data broker loophole”, which allows the government to buy Americans’ personal data without a warrant.

Keep ReadingShow less