News

Pro-Palestine Encampment Represents First Major Test for Harvard President Alan Garber

News

Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu Condemns Antisemitism at U.S. Colleges Amid Encampment at Harvard

News

‘A Joke’: Nikole Hannah-Jones Says Harvard Should Spend More on Legacy of Slavery Initiative

News

Massachusetts ACLU Demands Harvard Reinstate PSC in Letter

News

LIVE UPDATES: Pro-Palestine Protesters Begin Encampment in Harvard Yard

The Price of Passion

Howard’s bold action on behalf of the Tibetan people is worthy of praise and punishment.

By The Crimson Staff

Civil disobedience can be an effective way to promote a just cause or just an unecessary nuisance. Either way, it usually gets punished. Harvard’s latest case—that of Meghan C. Howard ’04, who interrupted Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao’s Dec. 11 speech at Harvard Business School—did promote a just cause. But since Howard faced the Ad Board yesterday, it seems she will still have to pay the price for her outcry.

Her transgression? At Wen’s address, Howard, who is co-president of Students for a Free Tibet, unfurled a Tibetan flag and interrupted the Premier, yelling out, “Tibet belongs to the Tibetan people!” After being asked to return to her seat, she replied: “People in Tibet cannot speak so we must speak for them.”

It is heartening that Howard put her beliefs before her fear of adminstrative reprisal. We are proud of her passionate advocacy for people outside of Harvard Yard. Her conviction is sincere and unselfish. Howard’s cause was also worthy—we continue to support the Tibetan people in their fight for self-determination. And, though some kind of punishment seems inevitable, we hope that the Ad Board will make it a light one.

But, for the Ad Board’s part, the rule that Howard broke—interrupting a speaker at a University event—is one that is necessary and just for preserving the free-flowing dialogue of this community. Free speech must go both ways. Harvard’s rules recognize this, which is why the protesters gathered outside the event and the students who stood for minutes silently in the midst of the audience wearing t-shirts for justice in Taiwan, were not punished. Interrupting a speaker, however, is one person wielding his or her right of free speech to suppress another’s. An admonishment from the Ad Board—the likely punishment—is not unreasonable.

Knowingly violating the rules and gracefully accepting the punishment for the sake of a greater cause is at the heart of civil disobedience. By taking what the Ad Board has to give her, Howard will have made an even more powerful case for the Tibetan people.

Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.

Tags