Ironically, the Prime Minister’s cabinet is arguably a safe space for many
of the opinions that university safe spaces are seeking protection from
being curtailed by. As O’Neill (1990) sees it, the ‘exercise of free speech
by the powerful restricts the capacities of the powerless to exercise their
own equal rights’. Davies looks at where freedom of speech originated
from and those who benefit from wanting to keep it unchanged. He
says ‘the suggestion that young people are uniquely intolerant and
self-indulgent is a useful way of avoiding talking about other things’.
He continues: ‘At a time when student mental health is deteriorating,
the panic surrounding ‘free speech’ reinforces the notion that there is
something wrong with young people, and not with their environment’.
This returns to the idea that freedom of speech is a matter of power and
politics and that as such, the matter of tolerating intolerance in the name
of free speech should focus on the environment it operates in.
Levinas (1969) argues that, when faced with the other, instead of
asserting yourself, the moral thing to do is to call into question one’s own
freedom. He stresses the importance of the consequences of exercising
freedoms. Importantly, Levinas (1969) saw moral communication as an
endeavour rather than a set of rules; he argues this involves trying to
communicate in a way which is attentive to the other. In Otherwise and
Being, Levinas (1981) distinguishes between the ‘said’ and the ‘saying’.
He explains the ‘said’ as involving the ego, by dominating speech and
asserting oneself. Whereas, ‘saying’ is about exposing yourself to the
other, listening, taking their word and responding responsibly. Similarly,
Snel (2013) contests that if you really stand for freedom and for freedom
of speech, you should try to listen to ideas you disagree with. He refers
to the Danish religious free thinker Soren Kierkegaard who believed that
people demand freedom of speech instead of just freedom of thought,
because otherwise they would be forced to think (p.124). Remembering
that safe spaces are places where students who may not usually be
heard are given the chance to be, it seems curious to hold the position
that freedom of speech is being ‘shut down’ by ‘entitled students’.
In a way, online platforms are a lot of people’s safe space. They are
where many people go to feel like they can express themselves and be
heard. On the one hand, online platforms, particularly Twitter, can provide
a very good insight into someone’s ‘inner world’, and this can encourage
empathy and listening to the other. It is a platform with the potential to
progress moral communication, build empathy, promote understanding
37