Editorial: Don’t wall off public protests

A couple of public protests provide an opportunity to examine the theoretical embrace of free speech vs. real-world instincts to shut it down or define when it’s “appropriate.”

In Pullman, the Washington State University College Republicans plan to erect a “Trump Wall” to spark a discussion about illegal immigration. This has already occurred at the University of Washington.

Professional football players are sitting or kneeling during the playing of the national anthem to spotlight issues surrounding racial injustice.

Both protests have been met with the criticism that they’re out of place and insensitive. Your level of tolerance may align with your beliefs on race and immigration.

In response to the upcoming “Trump Wall,” a Latino student said he respects the free speech rights of College Republicans, but said the tactic is offensive.

“As a Latino student, it’s disappointing to see that some of my peers want to do something like this and put other students in an uncomfortable situation,” Eduardo Ramos said in a Spokesman-Review article.

Before scoffing at the notion of students needing a cushion against discomfort, consider the complaints against professional football player Colin Kaepernick, who first used the national anthem to protest perceived injustices. Since then, others have joined him.

Many people say this makes them uncomfortable, and that it’s offensive to members of the military and veterans. Trent Dilfer, an ESPN analyst, said Kaepernick’s job as a backup quarterback is to “be quiet and sit in the shadows.” As if critics would’ve been fine if the protest came from a starter.

Students are criticized for seeking “safe spaces” on college campuses. But that’s precisely what football fans want when telling protesters to take it elsewhere.

The Seattle Seahawks were lauded for Sunday’s pregame demonstration of standing and interlocking arms. But this show of unity was a continuation of the conversation, not a rebuke.

The fact is, the national anthem protest and the “Trump Wall” have accomplished their goals. There is more debate on racial injustice and illegal immigration.

Like democracy itself, free speech is messy. And it can be a pain in the neck when you’re the host. Just ask the city of Coeur d’Alene, which had to endure the marching neo-Nazis at city-sponsored parades. On the other hand, many compelling discussions sprang from those demonstrations.

Another WSU student, Anita Mendoza, responded this way to the “Trump Wall”:

“Many people that Trump wants to deport, the hardworking individuals that make it possible for us to have food on our table, come here for a better life – not to make things worse like he claims.”

An excellent point. A college campus is a great place to continue that debate. And football fans can endure silent protests, too.

In the land of the free, we shouldn’t try to wall off dissent.

To respond to this editorial online, go to www.spokesman.com and click on “Opinion.”