Another inane tribute to Holmes’s fatuous (and, naturally, much praised) “marketplace of ideas” drivel, which has been taken by free expression obsessives to mean we can never stop anything because “the discourse of dissent” is inextricably bound to the “rhetoric of revolution.” (Translation: We need to permit speech advocating violence and upheaval because there may be some kernel of truth in it that the ACLU and the NYTimes editorial page have overlooked.)
The weekend protest got goo-gobs of coverage from all major media. Do we really think that, beyond that, the First Amendment means we needed to let them vandalize a building — indeed, one of our historic treasures — lest we miss their edifying and vitally important message that America sucks?