Discussion about this post

User's avatar
thomas Dreyer's avatar

The author describes an optimal viewpoint. Peaceful protest, a rational discourse that is respectful exchange of ideas and the idea that there is no threat of violence and that local and State laws, such as no face mask or scarves covering the protesters face are followed. This has not been the case in many of these protest. Those in charge of these Universities have a duty to protect all of those who attend and are employed by the University as their foremost obligation. The student organizations mentioned in this article have failed to police their members in many of these Universities so it is not irrational that the State or the Universities themselves have taken proactive measures in order to protect others. What would be the rational response if a student KKK group showed up and started intimidating black students.

Expand full comment
Macrobius's avatar

A college exists to carry out its mission, expressed in its mission statement.

As noted, generally colleges state that they prepare citizens; and also state that they will do this in a collegial, respectful manner.

If a shy 18 year-old shows up on a campus that is roiling with action that seems to threaten the 18 year-old's beliefs, assumptions, faith, orientation, etc., there is little chance that the student will have the knowledge or skill to engage in debate or action. What 22 year-old has the courage and knowledge to stand up to a crowd?

A college is a not-for-profit entity. An important question, for a college, is whether financial support in the form of tuition income or alumni giving will continue. An endowment may pay for financial aid for half of an entering class; but the college will need to attract full pay students and meet budget. But why would a family want to send an 18 year-old to a college that targets for criticism (and worse) the group that the student belongs to? How is a hostile environment going to help the student focus on learning and growing in a community of learners? Where is the balance that would at least give the student an opportunity to engage in or listen to informed debate?

Demonstrations aim to mobilize groups for action. The intent of a crowd is not the "fearless sifting and winnowing" of knowledge" that is the purpose of higher education. (Fearless sifting and winnowing, University of Wisconsin, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sifting_and_winnowing )

A definition of citizenship that privileges demonstration over deliberation is likely one that will increasingly privilege demonstration, because intimidation works. The shy 18 year-old will retreat to a dorm room.

It would be a truly countercultural, radical, and free-speech stance for a college to say that debate is encouraged, and that civility guidelines must be followed, out of respect for the learning process of the undergraduates. If a responsible academic opposing view is not forthcoming (because faculty members are people and people are not comfortable in facing a hostile audience) a faculty member might volunteer to represent the out-of-favor view. Even the Inquisition provided the accused with a devil's advocate.

There are plenty of physical and virtual spaces where students can engage in activism. Allowing demonstrations to intimidate minority-opinion students on campus is a slippery slope to group-think and college financial instability.

Expand full comment
7 more comments...

No posts