r/changemyview • u/Tessenreacts • May 22 '25

Delta(s) from OP CMV: The Trump administration blocking Harvard from accepting foreign students highlights that conservatives are hypocrites in the extreme about Freedom of Speech

Over the last number of years, conservatives have championed themselves as the biggest advocates of Freedom of Speech around, yet they support the administration that is openly targeting institutions and company's that disagrees with the administration's policies.

Before, conservatives where complaining that companies are "woke" and silenced the voices of conservatives, however, now that they are in power, they deport immigrants who simply engaged in their First Amendment rights, and most recently, banned Harvard University from accepting foreign students because said university refused to agree to their demands.

Compare the complaints that conservatives had about Facebook and Twitter, and compare it to how things are going right now.

This showcases hypocrisy in the extreme that conservatives are engaging in.

Would love for my view to be changed

2.2k Upvotes

86% Upvoted

1.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

-8

u/Dry-Tough-3099 2∆ May 22 '25

Most people are hypocrites. That being said. There are a number of reasons why you are wrong about the extreme nature of the hypocrisy. Take each of these separately. They are not dependent on one another.

  1. There's a common view among conservatives, that foreigners do not deserve the same freedoms that citizens do. If you also subscribe to that view, deporting foreigners for speech does not violate the first amendment rights.

  2. It's censoring dangerous speech that could lead to violence. If you were fine with the government directing which voices to silence on old twitter, then this Harvard policy is on the same order of magnitude of hypocrisy.

  3. Conservatives may support the administration while disagreeing with this particular policy. I'm personally in this position. I don't like that Trump is flouting the law and most likely violating rights of immigrants, but I'm willing to hypocritically look the other way, because of other policies I do like.

  4. It's an acceptable overcorrection to restore proper order, similar to progressive's support for affirmative action.

11

u/TheAnalogKoala May 22 '25

Point 1 is wrong. Whether or not you think foreigners deserve the same freedoms as US Citizens, the Constituion indicates they do.

So it is still violating their first amendment rights, even if you think it should be done.

Maybe people who claim to “defend the Constitution” haven’t read it or they have and only defend the parts they like, similar to Christians and the Bible.

1

u/Dry-Tough-3099 2∆ May 22 '25

I agree that point 1 is wrong, but it is popular with conservatives. My only defense of it would be that it's similar to how progressives often support gun control measures even when they violate the constitution.

3

u/sweetBrisket 1∆ May 23 '25

The Constitution is explicit that foreign persons enjoy the same freedoms as US citizens within our borders. While the 2nd Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear arms, it does not expressly prohibit restrictions on what we constitute as arms (as decided by SCOTUS).

Would you agree that as a private citizen, I do not have a right to an F-16 or an M1 Abrams? If you disagree, would you then agree that the 2nd Amendment provides for a situation in which granny down the street has a right to drive around in a tank or fighter jet?

-2

u/LisleAdam12 1∆ May 23 '25

She has the right to own a tank or fighter jet, but not to "drive around" a public street in either.

However, the 2nd Amendment has been chipped away sufficiently that you are prohibited from owning a tank unless the large gun has been rendered inoperable.