The New Yorker Radio Hour

Episode: After Charlottesville, the Limits of Free Speech

Date: September 8, 2017
Host: David Remnick
Guests: Mark Bray, Melissa Murray, Dahlia Lithwick

Episode Overview

This episode of The New Yorker Radio Hour, hosted by David Remnick, explores the aftermath of the violent white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, and examines the fraught boundaries between free speech, protest, and violence in America. Guests include historian Mark Bray (author of The Anti-Fascist Handbook), Berkeley law professor Melissa Murray, and legal analyst Dahlia Lithwick, each offering a distinct perspective on the tensions between the First and Second Amendments, campus free speech, and the modern legacy of protest movements.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Understanding Antifa and the Varieties of Anti-Fascist Protest

[00:28–11:25] Guest: Mark Bray (interviewed by David Remnick)

• Origins & Tactics of Antifa:

  • Antifa is a collection of radical left groups, not mainstream liberals, who view direct action as essential to combating fascism—not just debate or state mechanisms.

    "What we're talking about here is a specific pan radical left politics that is not only about combating fascism, but also has an essentially socialist message." — Mark Bray [02:53]

  • Most Antifa activity is nonviolent: tracking and exposing white supremacists, organizing boycotts, stopping events before they happen.

    "A lot of this is essentially thankless drudgery of monitoring white supremacist and neo-Nazi groups... making phone calls or organizing boycotts... alerting communities." — Mark Bray [01:34]

  • Physical confrontation is considered a last resort when other methods fail.

• Efficacy and Ethics of Violence vs. Nonviolence:

  • Debate over whether violence undermines causes or, in some historical contexts, is necessary when state mechanisms fail (citing 1930s Germany and Cable Street in London, 1936).
  • Reminder that nonviolence and violence have often co-existed in movements; looming threats make nonviolent proposals more palatable.

    "In just about every historical circumstance you have some manifestation of both tendencies going on at the same time." — Mark Bray [04:10]

  • "I'm not trying to argue that any tactic is always the best tactic... sometimes when you get attacked by armed neo-Nazis, it's legitimate to defend yourself." — Mark Bray [10:23]

• Trump and Fascistic Qualities:

  • Bray does not call the Trump presidency fully fascist but points to "fascistic qualities" such as a cult of personality and xenophobia.

    "No, not at all. But I would say that Trump has fascistic qualities. His cult of personality, glorification of violence..." — Mark Bray [05:56]

• Free Speech and Self-Defense:

  • Historical examples (Skokie, Cable Street): Sometimes marginalized communities can’t count on majority populations or liberal values alone.

    "You can't always rely on the majority population to defend your interests if you're a minority sometimes." — Mark Bray [08:33]

  • The ethical legitimacy of self-defense against targeted violence.

• Campus Speech:

  • Bray would protest speakers like Steve Bannon but stops short of supporting violence at speeches; context matters.

    "Personally, I might write an op ed criticizing it. I would protest it. But personally, that's probably all I would do." — Mark Bray [10:53]

2. Free Speech, Campus Unrest, and Student Sensitivities

[12:28–23:09] Guest: Melissa Murray (interviewed by David Remnick)

• First-Hand Berkeley Account:

  • Describes the chaos during the Milo Yiannopoulos event: helicopters, violence, fear, and the presence of external protesters.

    “As soon as I drove out of the garage, you could hear helicopters overhead... People are slamming on the hood of the car and... throwing bottles.” — Melissa Murray [12:28]

• Are Campuses Hostile to Conservative Speech?

  • While some students and faculty resist opposing views, the narrative of “snowflake” hypersensitivity is overstated. Berkeley routinely hosts conservative speakers.

    "This idea that Berkeley is somehow hostile or resistant to viewpoints that don't cohere with some so-called Berkeley orthodoxy is patently false." — Melissa Murray [14:52]

• Administrative Dilemma:

  • Berkeley, birthplace of the free speech movement, is obligated to defend speech, even if offensive, so long as it doesn’t escalate into violence.

    "If you say that you are for free speech, you have to be for free speech, and that includes even speech that you might find offensive." — Melissa Murray [16:01]

• Students' Shifting Attitudes:

  • Younger students may conflate disagreement with discrimination, making classroom debates on issues like affirmative action feel personal.

    “To express opposition to affirmative action was conflated with expressing opposition to her. …But as a professor, I think it’s really important that a student be able to say, you know what? I have questions about this. I don’t agree with that position. I think this is a legitimate position to have.” — Melissa Murray [19:16]

  • The personal legacy of race at institutions like UVA and the emotional impact of racist incidents.

• Connecting Berkeley and Charlottesville:

  • Both serve as flashpoints for a larger, unresolved culture war over American history, discrimination, and the boundaries of speech and protest.

    "Yet I think they're united as being flashpoints for a kind of culture war... We as a country have not really done the hard work of reconciling our past." — Melissa Murray [21:30]

3. The Limits of Free Speech When Guns Are Involved (Charlottesville’s Legal and Social Legacy)

[24:48–39:09] Guest: Dahlia Lithwick (interviewed by David Remnick)

• Charlottesville and Monument Politics:

  • Local debates over Confederate statues escalated when white nationalists planned mass rallies.

    "The city council voted that they were to come down and a judge… enjoined that for six months." — Dahlia Lithwick [25:14]

• The ACLU’s Role and Legal Backlash:

  • The ACLU (and Rutherford Institute) sided with white nationalist organizers on First Amendment grounds, viewing the city’s effort to relocate the rally as viewpoint discrimination.

    “You are persecuting this group based on their ideas and their speech. That's classic First Amendment persecution.” — Dahlia Lithwick [26:26]

  • Judicial Dilemma: Was this a pure speech issue? Initially, yes, but open carry dramatically altered the calculus.

    "I think that he was wrong only insofar as he... did not think about the fact that these folks had guns." — Dahlia Lithwick [28:15]

• Guns as Speech and Intimidation:

  • Open carrying weapons at protests blurs lines between protected speech and intimidation.

    "There are folks open carrying in a performative way... Until we can figure out where the line is between what looks like intimidation and threats and what is simple protected second amendment activity... all these speech problems get swallowed into that black hole." — Dahlia Lithwick [31:52]

  • The presence of firearms can suppress counter-protesters’ willingness or ability to exercise their own speech.

• Institutional Responsibility and Historic Legacies:

  • The University of Virginia's deep historical ties to Confederate thought, and its struggle to anticipate and prevent violence.

    "You cannot ask any university... to subordinate its founding, its legacy, and to say, I want you to hate everything about what you were in order to join this century." — Dahlia Lithwick [34:40]

  • The university and city are both coping with trauma and institutional failures in responding to hate-fueled violence.

• Aftermath for the ACLU and Policy Changes:

  • The ACLU, deeply criticized post-Charlottesville, quickly revised its stance, now less willing to defend events where violence or intimidation is a real threat.

    "Within a day, the ACLU comes out and says, okay, now we're not for that speech... now we will be much more careful about not protecting what looks to be violent threats." — Dahlia Lithwick [35:48]

• National Lessons:

  • Local governments and universities must anticipate violence and clarify the distinction between speech and intimidation, especially regarding the intersection of First and Second Amendment rights.

    "We have a really profound problem with guns... There has been a strain of we can just stand here open, carrying with our semiautomatics, and it's just speech." — Dahlia Lithwick [36:41]

• View on Campus Speech Battles:

  • Lithwick sees the Berkeley situation as fundamentally different, defending the idea that more speech—not censorship—is the best remedy.

    "I'm going to continue to say on this, I am a free speech purist, that the cure for bad speech is more speech." — Dahlia Lithwick [38:43]

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• Mark Bray [01:34]: "A lot of this is essentially thankless drudgery of monitoring white supremacist and neo-Nazi groups... trying to contact employers... alerting communities that may be under attack."
• Mark Bray [08:33]: "You can't always rely on the majority population to defend your interests if you're a minority sometimes."
• Melissa Murray [12:28]: "One thing they don't tell you when you sign up to be the interim dean is like... you’ve got to make sure everyone's good to go before you leave the building in a situation like that."
• Melissa Murray [19:16]: "There was a way in which it was deeply personal to her, and to express opposition to affirmative action was conflated with expressing opposition to her."
• Dahlia Lithwick [28:49]: "When the police stand down... many clergy leaders... were telling me when guys came at me, you know, with clubs and with guns, antifa saved me."
• Dahlia Lithwick [31:52]: "Until we can figure out where the line is between what looks like intimidation and threats and what is simple protected second amendment activity, we can sort of say all these speech problems get swallowed into that black hole."
• Dahlia Lithwick [38:43]: "The cure for bad speech is more speech... shutting down speeches and speakers doesn’t make their ideas go away."

Timestamps for Key Segments

• [00:28–11:25] Mark Bray on Antifa, protest tactics, history, and free speech
• [12:28–23:09] Melissa Murray on Berkeley protests, campus speech culture, student attitudes, and parallels with Charlottesville
• [24:48–39:09] Dahlia Lithwick on Charlottesville’s legal battles, the role of guns, ACLU policy shifts, university legacies, and reflections on moving forward

Conclusion

This episode thoughtfully unpacks the intricate intersections of free speech, violence, race, history, and the law following Charlottesville. It achieves a nuanced balance—amplifying the voices of scholars and witnesses who wrestle with both the value and the risks of radical protest, the ambiguities between speech and intimidation, and the responsibilities of institutions in a polarized era.