Merriam-Webster defines "fascism" as, among other things a group that engages in "[...Forcible suppression of opposition."

Over the past few years I've read a lot about speakers, mostly conservatives, being shouted down on college campuses across the nation, often instigated or aided by teachers/administrators. Last month I saw it myself at University of Texas - San Antonio when a conservative commentator came for a visit. It was sponsored by a campus group called Movement for the Future. My wife, a UTSA student went to see the presentation for extra credit in a class and invited me along.

The speaker was David Horowitz; I might have to turn in my conservative credentials after saying this, but I really did not know much about Horowitz or his group/agenda. There were hand-outs at the event from his group and his main beef seems to be he wants teachers in colleges and universities to (1) Be qualified to teach whatever subjects they teach and (2) allow free, open discourse on issues raised in the classroom and, (3) not reward or punish students for their political or social views, whatever they may be. Now this is a simplification and does not cover their entire agenda, which you can peruse at the above link.

I frankly think the student group over-paid; Horowitz seemed unprepared and engaged in rambling stories, often forgetting his place and moving on to other subjects (and this was before the disruptions started). He said more than one time he was exhausted from travel and I'll take him at his word. Perhaps he should give Forward Movement at UTSA an "exhausted speaker discount."

After about 30 minutes of un-interrupted speech a student from another organization entered the auditorium and loudly announced that what amounted to a counter presentation was about to begin for anyone who wanted to attend. Okay, rude but not exactly speech suppression. This seemed to be a cue for some in the audience to start a heckling campaign that lasted the rest of the evening.

It started with just one or two, then began to spread. I saw more than one college employee applauding/encouraging the heckling. By the time it got around to the question and answer portion of the program, the line was stacked with students/attendees who launched into personal attacks, accusations of racism (To a former far left Black Panther supporter), and shouting down any answer they did not like.

I.F. Stone in Trial of Socratestells of the "bloodiest dictator," Ctritias. Critias was part of the Regime of Thirty Tyrants who ruled Athens in 404 B.C. after Athens defeat at the hands of the Spartans. A former student of Socrates, Critias arrested and murdered any who disagreed with him and had roving gangs of thugs who went about Athens beating anyone with a thought not sanctioned by the Thirty. (a Texas hat-tip to University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law)

How could a student of a man many describe as one of the most enlightened men of antiquity, a man who "set the standard for all subsequent western philosophy" turn into a bloody, ruthless tyrant? According to Stone, among others, it was likely because Socrates was an elitist, anti-democratic who tutored not one but two students who went on to be brutal dictators in his lifetime.

The point is, educated, even brilliant men can side philosophically and practically with thugs, dictators and profoundly anti-democratic systems/ideas. This applies to those on the left and right of the spectrum but for varying reasons.

I think many right of center find dictatorships not in our backyard tolerable if there is a benefit for our nation. This sort of French-realpolitik thinking had its zenith in the United States during the cold war of course, but is far from dead as a facet foreign policy in many schools of thought.

On the left you see some who engage in what seems like buoyant praise of dictators and their governments because they think they hold a moral candle to democracies/republics around the world.

Fast forward a few thousand years and children under the instruction of our nation's educated elite are being taught ideas that conflict with your own should be suppressed, rather than debated. Speech codes are the norm and students, often organized by professors/administrators use their constitutionally guaranteed right to assemble and protest to deprive others of their right to free speech.

At Columbia University this week, an African-American member of the Minutemen was peppered with racial slurs from the audience. Later, protestors rushed the stage, shouted/shut down the speech in a clearly premeditated act. Anyone who sees this video can clearly see this was one very, very small step from degenerating into assault.

Our campuses have become a breeding ground for future violence. When these young people go out into the real world, they will find themselves unable to defend their ideas because suppression of speech has replaced rhetoric at so many schools. More disturbing, they are already trained to respond with actual or quasi violence when confronted with ideas they disagree with. It does not have to be a majority of the students and teachers. History has shown us again and again what a violent, ideological minority can do.