Universities Curbing Free Speech

Annie

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Messages
50,848
Reaction score
4,826
Points
1,790
It's been going on for quite awhile:

http://www.tnr.com/blog/openuniversity?pid=121168

06.28.07

LIBERTY VERSUS EQUALITY:

by Robert Brustein

The latest conflict in the academy between freedom of expression and ethnic and sexual diversity took place at Vassar College recently when minority students called for the banning of a school newspaper called "The Imperialist" because it criticized the creation of special social centers for minority and gay students. (The students were upset by the magazine's "insulting" comparison of these centers with a "ghetto" and a "zoological preserve.") The matter was resolved when the student association that financed "The Imperialist" withheld funds from the publication for one year.

...

Tocqueville was among the first to observe that there was a basic tension in our system--if not a basic disagreement--between the constitutional guarantees of liberty and of equality. Equal under the law, Americans were conspicuously unequal in many other ways, the most obvious being inequality of income. But there has also been a continuing tension between the need to speak what is perceived as the truth and the need to protect minority feelings--between the need to achieve excellence (now known as "elitism") and the need to maintain an illusion of egalitarianism (now known as "political correctness")--and this has inevitably led to some kind of speech suppression.

It is sometimes forgotten that freedom of expression was an afterthought to the Constitution, and that freedom of the press, of religion, and of assembly were only guaranteed later under the First Amendment. The reason these freedoms (religion excepted) are so easily abrogated these days is that they don't really mean that much to ordinary citizens. They were designed for artists, journalists, writers, dissidents, radicals, and other such atypical Americans. Given the history of dissent in the academy, one would have expected that university students and university professors would also have cherished these freedoms, and would also have fought to protect them, but that seems to be less and less the case. In the fifties, the liberties of many universities were suspended under pressure of McCarthyism. Today, they are under siege from their own faculties, administrations, and student bodies.
 

red states rule

Senior Member
Joined
May 30, 2006
Messages
16,011
Reaction score
573
Points
48
Nothing new Kathy

Do you remember this gem? Campus security and school administrators stood by and watched


Anarchy at Columbia: Protestors Storm Minuteman's Stage
By Nathan Burchfiel
CNSNews.com Staff Writer
October 05, 2006

(CNSNews.com) - Protestors stormed the stage at Columbia University Wednesday night, yelling, waving banners and ending the speech from Minuteman Project founder Jim Gilchrest minutes after it began.

As Gilchrest started to deliver his remarks at a speech sponsored by the CU College Republicans, members of the audience began yelling and cheering. He watched quietly as students rushed the stage with fists raised and displayed banners proclaiming, "No One Is Illegal."

According to a statement released by Columbia University College Republicans President Chris Kulawik, protestors took control of the stage for "fifteen chaotic minutes" before security personnel ended the event.

Video of the event posted online shows the protestors rushing the stage. It also shows members of the audience cheering them on and chanting "Minutemen, Nazis, KKK ... racist fascists go away."

According to reports in the student newspaper The Spectator, at least one student was injured in the mayhem.

In a statement released by "those who occupied the stage" and posted on a student magazine's blog, the protestors said they "celebrate free speech: for that reason we allowed the Minutemen to speak, and for that same reason we peacefully occupied the stage and spoke ourselves."

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCampus.asp?Page=/Campus/archive/200610/CAM20061005a.html
 

onedomino

SCE to AUX
Joined
Sep 14, 2004
Messages
2,677
Reaction score
478
Points
98
On the other hand, what do you think of this:

University of Colorado President Recommends Firing Ward Churchill
Tuesday, May 29, 2007

Complete article: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,275999,00.html

DENVER — The president of the University of Colorado has recommended that a professor who likened some Sept. 11 victims to a Nazi should be fired, according to the professor and the school.
and then:

CU To Fire Ward Churchill
Professor Has Vowed To Sue If School Fired Him
June 27, 2006

complete article: http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/9424240/detail.html

BOULDER, Colo. -- The University of Colorado announced Monday that it will dismiss controversial professor Ward Churchill.

"Today, I issued to Professor Churchill a notice of intent to dismiss him from his faculty position at the University of Colorado Boulder," CU Interim Chancellor Phil DiStefano said Monday afternoon.

Churchill has 10 days to appeal, which entails making a request to have the university president or chancellor forward the recommendation to the faculty senate Committee on Privilege and Tenure. A special panel will then conduct hearings on the matter and make a recommendation to the president on whether grounds for dismissal are supported.
 

red states rule

Senior Member
Joined
May 30, 2006
Messages
16,011
Reaction score
573
Points
48
NY Times Attacks Anti-PC Documentary, Defends College Censorship of Conservatives
Posted by Clay Waters on June 28, 2007 - 13:08.
Joseph Berger's New York Times column on education doubled as a film review. "Film Portrays Stifling of Speech, but One College's Struggle Reflects a Nuanced Reality" criticized an anti-PC documentary, "Indoctrinate U," by bringing in an incident that occurred at Vassar college that was not even featured in the movie. Berger actually defended Vassar punishing a conservative campus publication by defunding it and shutting it down for a year.

"A new documentary is making the rounds that argues, with vivid examples, that the nation's colleges are squelching freedom of expression and are no longer free marketplaces of ideas.

"The film carries the striking title 'Indoctrinate U,' and was made by Evan Coyne Maloney, who describes himself as a libertarian and is looking for a national distributor.

"The film borrows the technique of ambush interviews from an ideological opposite, Michael Moore, and tells how at California Polytechnic State University, a student underwent a daylong disciplinary hearing for posting a flier publicizing a black speaker whose talk was titled, 'It’s O.K. to Leave the Plantation.' "

http://newsbusters.org/node/13807

and for the article in the NY Slimes

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/27/education/27education.html
 

Toro

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2005
Messages
85,233
Reaction score
23,060
Points
2,180
Location
Surfing the Oceans of Liquidity
The censorship of speech at Universities, and the pandering to the PC crowd is one of the most disturbing trends of the past 20 years, IMO.

Universities are bastions of progress, and free thought and speech are critical in the advancement of science and society.

How very sad.
 

red states rule

Senior Member
Joined
May 30, 2006
Messages
16,011
Reaction score
573
Points
48
The censorship of speech at Universities, and the pandering to the PC crowd is one of the most disturbing trends of the past 20 years, IMO.

Universities are bastions of progress, and free thought and speech are critical in the advancement of science and society.

How very sad.
Universities have no problem with free speech - as long as it is liberal speech and is approved by the liberal Professors
 

onedomino

SCE to AUX
Joined
Sep 14, 2004
Messages
2,677
Reaction score
478
Points
98
You are aware the tiff was about his LYING on his application when he joined the University and his plagerism and other unethical behavior?
Yes, I am. And he should be fired. But are those the real reasons they are getting rid of him? I wonder if any of that would have come to light if not for the anti US rants? Unfortunately (if not for the reasons you cited), in order to apply academic freedom consistently, he would probably have to be retained. I imagine the University's lawyers were working OT to figure out how to legally get rid of him.
 

RetiredGySgt

Diamond Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
47,980
Reaction score
10,026
Points
2,040
Location
North Carolina
Yes, I am. And he should be fired. But are those the real reasons they are getting rid of him? I wonder if any of that would have come to light if not for the anti US rants? Unfortunately (if not for the reasons you cited), in order to apply academic freedom consistently, he would probably have to be retained. I imagine the University's lawyers were working OT to figure out how to legally get rid of him.
And there is a problem with that? It is unimportant WHY or how they found out he was a liar, a fraud and a stealer of others works. If he were none of those things he would not be in danger, nor would the school try to fire him. In fact until that all came out, they were very vocal in their support of him.
 

red states rule

Senior Member
Joined
May 30, 2006
Messages
16,011
Reaction score
573
Points
48
This is interesting...........

The two Universities of Texas
How can any self-respecting liberal countenance academic programs in which there is only one side presented to the most controversial issues of the day?


By David Horowitz
There are two universities operating under the name the University of Texas.

One is a world-class academic institution. Its faculty is professional and dedicated to disinterested scholarly inquiry. Its courses observe the principles of scientific method, and its students are taught to respect evidence and to demand more than one perspective on matters that are controversial.

But there is a second university, which is quite different in its methods and goals. This university's faculty regard themselves as activists, not scholars, and their method is that of authority, not science. Their curriculum is designed not to teach students how to conduct a disinterested inquiry, but to convert them to a sectarian ideology and recruit them to its causes.

Students in this university are taught to respect dogma rather than evidence. They are offered a curriculum that is relentlessly one-sided, one that denies legitimacy to dissenting points of view. Students are being given an indoctrination, not an education.

Among the departments and programs at UT that are parties to this scam are the Communicat-ions Studies Department, the Center for Women's and Gender Studies and the Division of Rhetoric and Writing. Space only permits a glimpse of the problem.

The stated mission of the Center for Women's and Gender Studies does not propose a disinterested inquiry into the history and condition of women or the nature of gender and its place in different societies. Instead, its stated mission is "to advance knowledge and understanding about ... the role that gender plays in structuring society."

The idea that gender structures society is an ideological claim, not a program for scholarly investigation. This claim is the organizing principle of gender feminism, a radical sect of the broader movement. Not surprisingly, the reading lists for courses in the department are almost exclusively drawn from radical feminist texts.

Graduate students in an Introduction to Women's and Gender Studies course, for example, are provided with a reading list that includes scores of texts written from a radical viewpoint. Only one text blatantly criticizes the radical feminist perspective. This is a book written by two founders of women's studies who subsequently left the field, because they felt it had become totally devoted to a political ideology to the point that its practitioners regularly denied scientific findings that conflicted with their political agendas.

for the complete article

http://media.www.dailytexanonline.c...n/The-Two.Universities.Of.Texas-2727824.shtml
 
OP
Annie

Annie

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Messages
50,848
Reaction score
4,826
Points
1,790
Does anyone find the idea that universities, where exposure and exploration of various philosophies, theories, and ideas should be encouraged, are becoming instead bastions of indoctrination? While more are encouraging the ideas of the left, there has also been an increase of those claiming to be 'conservative.' I don't think it's good for anyone.

Like reporters writing articles, it's foolish in my opinion to believe that a professor should be expected to leave his lectures 'bias free.' On the other hand, while not having an editor he should be expected to allow his students to argue another side without fear of retribution by grade or humiliation in class. Now those problems have always existed and the most motivated students have figured out in the past that they can appeal to the administrators of said professor and should. They could write editorial pieces or letters to the school newspapers. There are many examples in the past 30 years or so, where this has become problematic for the student or a group of students, as the universities themselves react to their complaints, on their ideas, cutting off discussion.

Examples abound, of which for our purposes more are not needed. Instead of examples, anyone have some suggestions of how the system could be remedied?
 

red states rule

Senior Member
Joined
May 30, 2006
Messages
16,011
Reaction score
573
Points
48
See no dissent, call it science
By Debra J. Saunders
Tuesday, January 30, 2007


It is a sign of how politicized global warming has become when a father's push for his daughter's junior high school science class to present both sides of the global warming controversy becomes a national story -- with the father being portrayed as the villain.

To recap, Frosty Hardison, the parent of a seventh-grader who attends school in Federal Way, Wash., was troubled to learn that science teacher Kay Walls had planned on showing her class Al Gore's global-warming pic "An Inconvenient Truth" -- without presenting any contrary information.


http://www.townhall.com/columnists/DebraJSaunders/2007/01/30/see_no_dissent,_call_it_science
 
OP
Annie

Annie

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Messages
50,848
Reaction score
4,826
Points
1,790
See no dissent, call it science
By Debra J. Saunders
Tuesday, January 30, 2007


It is a sign of how politicized global warming has become when a father's push for his daughter's junior high school science class to present both sides of the global warming controversy becomes a national story -- with the father being portrayed as the villain.

To recap, Frosty Hardison, the parent of a seventh-grader who attends school in Federal Way, Wash., was troubled to learn that science teacher Kay Walls had planned on showing her class Al Gore's global-warming pic "An Inconvenient Truth" -- without presenting any contrary information.


http://www.townhall.com/columnists/DebraJSaunders/2007/01/30/see_no_dissent,_call_it_science
The thread is on 'universities'.
 
OP
Annie

Annie

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Messages
50,848
Reaction score
4,826
Points
1,790
It seems the left is expanding their indoctrination

Get them when they are young
Why are you derailing? Start an education thread or expand on one that's gone before, please.
 

Larkinn

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2007
Messages
5,598
Reaction score
174
Points
48
You are aware the tiff was about his LYING on his application when he joined the University and his plagerism and other unethical behavior?
No, it wasn't. That was an excuse to get rid of a politically outspoken professor. If he had never said the eichmann comment, he never would have gotten fired.

Does anyone find the idea that universities, where exposure and exploration of various philosophies, theories, and ideas should be encouraged, are becoming instead bastions of indoctrination? While more are encouraging the ideas of the left, there has also been an increase of those claiming to be 'conservative.' I don't think it's good for anyone.
Yes, and no. The thing is, people speak of them as if most ideas are stifled or if people can't speak their mind. As long as you aren't far-right (blacks/jews should die) or far left (little eichmann comment) you will be alright. At least if you are a student. But there is an increasing attitude of homogeneity and that professors especially need to toe a certain line. This is true in both conservative and liberal schools and yes, its a crying shame.

On the other hand, while not having an editor he should be expected to allow his students to argue another side without fear of retribution by grade or humiliation in class
I think that is generally true. It has always been in my experience. I was a philosophy major and so all sorts of crazy ideas were bantered about. As far as I know nobody ever got docked for those ideas, or felt there was any possibility of that happening.

The real problem in my view is what is happening to the professors who are getting hired. It is coming to the point where their beliefs matter. Their beliefs should be irrelevant, it should merely be their competence, experience, and intelligence which gets them hired. This happens on both sides of the asile. Finkelstein, for example, didn't get tenure because of a smear attack by the right. This is not just a "liberal" thing, it is a liberty and free rights thing which both sides are guilty of, and both sides need to address.

Examples abound, of which for our purposes more are not needed. Instead of examples, anyone have some suggestions of how the system could be remedied?
Yup. Stop thinking of liberals or democrats or republicans or conservatives as "the other side". We are all Americans, we should all be trying to do whats best for our country, and the world. We have different priorities, disagree about what should be done, have different religions, races, backgrounds, education levels, jobs, but in the end we all have very similar political goals.

So why all the hostility? Why this newfound hatred of people who simply don't agree with your solutions to Americas problems? Frankly, hardly anyone on this board, or in this country is intelligent enough that they should be certain of their own solutions. Most people don't know all the facts about any particular issue and haven't spent years trying to figure it out. So why the hell do you have such a strong, unchanging opinion that if people disagree with, you find them despicable?

I think the ACLU is an organization with a tremendous amount of integrity. Not because "omg lawls they are liberal and you are so you loive them" but because they are willing to defend people who they, and I, disagree with so strongly that its absurd. They defended neo nazis right to march. When was the last time you saw that happen in America...that someone stood up and said "I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it". It doesn't happen anymore, and its a sad indictment upon our community that it doesn't. We are so polarized that we don't recognize the other side as human. I honestly feel hatred from some people on this board for the one single reason that they disagree with my views politically. What have we become?

Anyway...I think that this trend in universities is merely a micro-cosm of what is happening in the political world today. Its sad and regrettable but I don't think it will go away until we change how we do politics. We need someone to unite this country, not someone who is going to get 51% of the vote again.
 

RetiredGySgt

Diamond Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
47,980
Reaction score
10,026
Points
2,040
Location
North Carolina
No, it wasn't. That was an excuse to get rid of a politically outspoken professor. If he had never said the eichmann comment, he never would have gotten fired.



Yes, and no. The thing is, people speak of them as if most ideas are stifled or if people can't speak their mind. As long as you aren't far-right (blacks/jews should die) or far left (little eichmann comment) you will be alright. At least if you are a student. But there is an increasing attitude of homogeneity and that professors especially need to toe a certain line. This is true in both conservative and liberal schools and yes, its a crying shame.



I think that is generally true. It has always been in my experience. I was a philosophy major and so all sorts of crazy ideas were bantered about. As far as I know nobody ever got docked for those ideas, or felt there was any possibility of that happening.

The real problem in my view is what is happening to the professors who are getting hired. It is coming to the point where their beliefs matter. Their beliefs should be irrelevant, it should merely be their competence, experience, and intelligence which gets them hired. This happens on both sides of the asile. Finkelstein, for example, didn't get tenure because of a smear attack by the right. This is not just a "liberal" thing, it is a liberty and free rights thing which both sides are guilty of, and both sides need to address.



Yup. Stop thinking of liberals or democrats or republicans or conservatives as "the other side". We are all Americans, we should all be trying to do whats best for our country, and the world. We have different priorities, disagree about what should be done, have different religions, races, backgrounds, education levels, jobs, but in the end we all have very similar political goals.

So why all the hostility? Why this newfound hatred of people who simply don't agree with your solutions to Americas problems? Frankly, hardly anyone on this board, or in this country is intelligent enough that they should be certain of their own solutions. Most people don't know all the facts about any particular issue and haven't spent years trying to figure it out. So why the hell do you have such a strong, unchanging opinion that if people disagree with, you find them despicable?

I think the ACLU is an organization with a tremendous amount of integrity. Not because "omg lawls they are liberal and you are so you loive them" but because they are willing to defend people who they, and I, disagree with so strongly that its absurd. They defended neo nazis right to march. When was the last time you saw that happen in America...that someone stood up and said "I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it". It doesn't happen anymore, and its a sad indictment upon our community that it doesn't. We are so polarized that we don't recognize the other side as human. I honestly feel hatred from some people on this board for the one single reason that they disagree with my views politically. What have we become?

Anyway...I think that this trend in universities is merely a micro-cosm of what is happening in the political world today. Its sad and regrettable but I don't think it will go away until we change how we do politics. We need someone to unite this country, not someone who is going to get 51% of the vote again.
So your claiming he didn't lie about his heritage? He didn't plagerize anyone?

As to ACLU, please provide me a link to the last time they defended anyone exersizing their 2nd Amendment rights? Or ascerting their right as a father to prevent an abortion. Perhaps you can remind us of when the ACLU defended anyone for being a non Union member and fired because their shop went Union and they were not allowed to join said Union?
 

Larkinn

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2007
Messages
5,598
Reaction score
174
Points
48
So your claiming he didn't lie about his heritage? He didn't plagerize anyone?

As to ACLU, please provide me a link to the last time they defended anyone exersizing their 2nd Amendment rights? Or ascerting their right as a father to prevent an abortion. Perhaps you can remind us of when the ACLU defended anyone for being a non Union member and fired because their shop went Union and they were not allowed to join said Union?
*sigh*...

way to miss the point and go for the partisan throat once again...
 

RetiredGySgt

Diamond Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
47,980
Reaction score
10,026
Points
2,040
Location
North Carolina
*sigh*...

way to miss the point and go for the partisan throat once again...
You have claimed that the ACLU is impartial and a watchdog for our rights. That is simply not true. They are partisan and make political decisions based on a specific political agenda as to what to defend and why.

Are they useful? Sure they are, if you happen to fall in the areas they care about.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top