Ahmadinejad's visit to Columbia
Two fairly good blog posts regarding the proposed vist of Mahmoud Ahamadinejad to the University of Columbia for a speech and Q & A session. One by Jason Steck at the Van Der Galien Gazette and the other by Shamanic at the Newshoggers.
Both note that the vast majority of the conservative net is in an uproar over the visit, and that as a result they are missing the point to some degree; this is a chance to confront the guy about all that you don't like about him and Iran, not an endorsment of his views by the university.
From Steck's post and the comments, the conservative argument is apparently justified because of the treatment given to highly-conservative speakers,and the hypocrisy of this move. I have never been to a US university campus, so I can't personally say if this argument carries weight, and I don't normally take the word of people who claim bias in their opponents, but I do know from reading David Brin, that this scenario isn't too far off the mark. He regularly scolds his readers for driving out the conservative thinkers from the university circles and into "think tanks", where they were able to create the echo chamber effect we so know and love today.
Considered as a whole, what strikes me, is that given most of Ahmadinejad's views, if he were an American, most of the critics and defenders would have their roles reversed. I mean, if you look at the list of questions shamanic would like to challenge him on, they all fit right into the Christian Conservative movement, (which I believe is her point). And Steck is right to point out that such a "scholar", stripped of the world leader status Ahmadinejad has, would face massive resistance and protests from the left were he to be invited for a talk.
The lesson? Hypocrisy comes in many guises, but the free exchange of ideas is important, particularly those you don't agree with, for it is by this means and this means only, that they can be challenged and robbed of their importance if they are found wanting.
