The Harper’s Letter: When the Boring Becomes Incendiary

“Since the response to the letter was far from boring, two things can be asserted. First, a growing minority no longer believes free speech to be valuable. Secondly, those who do believe in free speech no longer believe that it is fully operational.”

Some things in life are simply improved by being boring. Washing laundry is most enjoyable when it is dull, and visiting the doctor for a check-up is only pleasant if nothing of interest happens. Likewise, when a major magazine publishes a letter affirming a belief in one of Western Civilization’s core principles, I sleep much easier when the response consists of glazed eyes and the nodding of heads in agreement.

Last week, Harper’s Magazine published a letter simply stating that no individual should be persecuted solely for his or her opinion. Stuffed with platitudes about free speech being “the lifeblood of a liberal society”—and the importance of “robust and even caustic counter-speech from all quarters”—the letter was so unremarkable that it should not have stirred even the most cantankerous pundit. Yet the response to the letter was anything but boring.

Immediately after being published on Harper’s website, pundits on both sides of the free speech debate felt obliged to offer an opinion. Those in favor of the letter said it was about time a major magazine took a stand for free speech and argued that cancel culture has created a toxic environment in many workplaces. Meanwhile, the opposing side claimed, variously, that cancel culture is not real; that it is real but does not matter; that all cultures are cancel cultures; and that cancel culture is a symptom of a broken political system.