I am growing concerned for the future of one of my favorite landmarks, the Free Expression Tunnel, and what it says about N.C. State.

Yes, there are justified limits on free expression. Essentially, it should not infringe upon basic freedoms. For example, child pornography in the FET would constitute a very reasonable infraction. Beyond a minimal set of reasonable ground rules, however, Tunnel censorship is a dangerous precedent at best.

I empathize with protesters, but in accepting the FET’s namesake, we must allow expression of the vacuous with the substantive, the hate with the love. We must not myopically convince ourselves that tolerance demands censorship, nor should we smugly leverage University image above the virtues of free expression.

No basic freedoms are harmed through non-threatening hate speech. Remember, the FET allows anyone to deface or overwrite anything inside, ideally in a creative way. Everyone on campus has had a say-so for decades, which accumulates to self-regulation and quality control. Why “fix” what works if we let it?

Perhaps the alleged bigots behind the graffiti were not bigots at all. They could have been tongue-in-cheek pranksters who wanted to get our goat. I have no evidence to offer, but even if they were seriously motivated, the agitators are receiving the attention and drama they crave: they have won. Blocking the FET from traffic or from painting inside is frankly rude and protects nothing. Surely, we can be more constructive than risking another landmark misnomer.

Nathan Wilson

senior, computer engineering