I've seen Indoctrinate U, and there are indeed many scandalous cases of University censorship presented in the film. It is disappointing, however, that instead of keeping the focus squarely on free speech, both Lou Dobbs and the director got sidetracked by Noel Ignatiev's comments on "whiteness." It reinforces the perception that many conservatives are less interested in free speech than in agitprop.

It reinforces the perception that many conservatives are less interested in free speech than in agitprop.

The perception is accurate, because that's all many conservatives care about.

Tu quoque. Agitprop is neither a conservative nor a liberal property. But to claim that it is the provenance of the one or the other, without acknowledging that ideologues of all stripes exist, is to engage in partisan agitprop. Sheesh.

I agree that partisan agitprop is not a monopoly of any political ideology. What I find interesting, however, is that while ACLU liberals and libertarians (who have been an object of open contempt on the right for more than 25 years) devote much of their energy to defending the rights of people with whom they disagree, the prevailing conservative discourse surrounding free speech seem to be overwhelmingly preoccupied with the supposed persecution of... well... conservatives. (There are exceptions, of course, including this blog.) It's hard to not watch the Ignatiev segment on Indoctrinate U or Lou Dobbs without getting the message that *this* guy—an unpatriotic, reverse-racist leftist—is the kind of person we *should* be censoring.

Liberals and progressives, of course, have their own brand of hypocrisy.