THE PRINCIPLES BEHIND
THE FSM PLATFORM
ON THE CONTENT OF EXPRESSION:
We hold that only courts of law can legitimately judge whether or not the content of a
particular speech is lawful. The Administration has held that the University must reserve
the right to indict and try a student if it feels that the student has made improper use
of his right to advocate.
There are two possible ways the Administration
may act. It may hold that the student's speech is improper because it constitutes a crime.
In this case, their indictment and hearing will be a clear invitation to the District
Attorney to initiate criminal proceedings.
He will be shielded from the protest such
criminal proceedings would normally invoke, because a respected institution has declared
the action a crime. Furthermore, the hearings would provide information which might
otherwise be legally unobtainable. On the other hand, they may indict the student on a
charge which does not constitute a crime.
In this case they would be declaring improper
speech which is protected by the first and fourteenth amendments. They would be judging
that less political freedom should obtain on the campus than off.
There are many more reasons we hold the
Administration proposal to be objectionable. In brief they include: Our belief that due
process on campus would be almost impossible to obtain; our belief that indictment would
occur as a response to outside pressures rather than to the actions of particular
students; and our realization that if entities other than the courts begin convicting of
unlawful advocacy, it will be impossible to develop the now-sparse case law pertaining to
the relevant issues.
ON THE FORM OF EXPRESSION:
The bulk of the changes we propose in the regulations are meant to ease unnecessary
restrictions on the forms of advocacy. We have tried to formulate regulations which
consistently apply the principle that any restriction on campus political activity whose
effect is to hamper, harass, or inhibit, and which cannot be based upon a sound and
compelling demonstration that it is necessary for the efficient functioning of the
University, must not exist.
ON STUDENT PARTICIPATION IN THE ENACTMENT,
ENFORCEMENT AND INTERPRETATION OF REGULATIONS GOVERNING POLITICAL ACTIVITY:
We hold that students should have an effective voice in the enactment, interpretation, and
enforcement of regulations governing campus political activity. When a body of students is
constituted to perform this function, we hold that a majority of its members should be
democratically selected by the students directly involved in political activities.