Dozens of students at Brunel University in London have conducted a protest against Katie Hopkins as she was taking part in a debate.
The students first turned their backs on her as she began to speak and then walked out of the auditorium.
Media personality Hopkins has made several remarks in the past that ethnic minorities have considered to be racist or Islamophobic. She was taking part in a debate about the welfare state on Monday.
According to the Brunel University website “The first part of the debate… was characterised by a number of audience members who exercised their right to peaceful protest about Miss Hopkins’ inclusion on the panel by standing, turning their backs and walking out of the auditorium – leaving the rest of the audience to continue the debate without them.
“When later challenged about the response, Miss Hopkins told the audience that, more than anyone, she accepted other people’s viewpoints no matter how far removed they were from her own, adding, ‘It is one of the most beautiful things there is to listen to alternative views.'”
Meanwhile, the Brunel Union president Ali Milani said that he was “especially proud to be a part of Brunel.”
He wrote: “The inclusion of Ms Hopkins has been met with wide spread outcry from the student body and the Students’ Union.
Subscribe to our newsletter and stay updated on the latest news and updates from around the Muslim world!
“It is important to note that the conversation at no point has been about banning Ms Hopkins from speaking on campus, or denying her right to speak. It is instead about saying it is distasteful and incongruous for our University, as part of a 50th celebration event, to provide a platform to someone who adds nothing to the intellectual or academic discourse; and an individual who publicly utters such overtly bigoted views.
“In short, we have a far higher opinion of our institution than Katie Hopkins and don’t believe the 50th Anniversary celebration should be summed up by the appearance of someone who has no association with Brunel, and provides no valuable intellectual insight.
“This leads us onto a wider question. In the current social media climate, where everyone is provided an online platform to speak, do we need to have a serious conversation, as a student movement and a society, on how we deal with online trolls?
“These are people who make their living by deliberately saying belligerent and offensive statements. Katie Hopkins is the physical manifestation of these trolls and we should not be providing the oxygen to her fire.
“So we have to ask ourselves: Is inviting someone who has no intellectual or political credibility providing any valuable intellectual nuance to debates in our society?
“At a time when we must be discussing how we do more for disabled people, is this a valuable addition to debate? In an age where thousands of refugees are dying in the Mediterranean Sea, attempting to escape persecution, is this a valuable addition to the debate?
“The answers are simple and clear; and were answered by our students last night. Their opposition (if I may speak for them) was one of taste and not of free speech. Because it is in fact patronising to have us bullied into providing someone with a seat in our house.
“Rights go hand in hand with responsibilities; you have the right to fart in public lift, it doesn’t mean you should exercise it. Needlessly to say, I stand in full solidarity with those that chose to partake in the action, respectfully voicing their discontent. They have made me proud to be their representative.”
