What Happens On Campus Cannot Stay On Campus

Vietnam passions ran high in the mid-1960’s when I attended the then highly-ranked, and needless to say predominantly liberal, Brooklyn College of C.U.N.Y. Nonetheless, there was a community that took a broad common liberal arts curriculum, delving into basic texts and knowledge. Political disagreements were strong but civil, the right of all to speak being without question. The most popular prof of the History of Economic Theory was an open Marxist, who was respected for his proven depth of knowledge and fair presentations.

Santa Cruz is a pleasant town, south of San Jose, and home to a University of California campus. It’s often jokingly called a cultural throwback to the ‘60’s.

That’s not necessarily a bad thing, compared to today, as an editorial in its newspaper just demonstrated, “As We See It: Campuses hurt by elitists.” While strongly disagreeing with those on the Right who may exaggerate the campus’ leftward tilt, the Santa Cruz Sentinel says,

UC Regents this week rescinded a speaking invitation from former Harvard President Lawrence Summers after a group of UC professors signed a petition protesting his appearance.

This is what higher education comes down to here in 2007: if a self-appointed cabal of elitists whose leftist views differ with others, they spring into action to deny people the right to speak….

But others now don't think that Summers has the right to even speak before the regents at a dinner.

Even some of those who opposed Summers at Harvard are aghast at the UC reaction. According to the Harvard Crimson newspaper, professor Judith Ryan — a critic of Summers — said the authors of the petition "have fallen prey to a simplification that became widespread in media reports... . [W]e should be able to listen to views with which we don't agree, and to debate them in a civil way."

As we non-academics say: "Duh."

Freedom of speech is a cornerstone of our country, our society and, at one time, on our college campuses. Sadly, that's no longer the case….

This is not a tough one. Those who live a life of the brain owe the world a free-flowing exchange of ideas. From the left. From the right. From wherever.

The self-appointed cabals are playing with fire. They make a good living from taxpayers who are willing pay big dollars to keep our universities thriving.

But they won't thrive much longer if they continue with their politically correct censorship.

Former Harvard arts and sciences and now George Mason law professor Peter Berkowitz wrote an important piece recently, “Our Compassless Colleges.” (Behind Wall Street Journal subscription wall, but available here.) He decries the substitution of fragmented values-driven multidisciplinary liberal arts curriculums and of ethnic curriculums for primary introduction to the basics, particularly in the humanities. The weak foundation provided by lack of a common core curriculum in the basics encourages partisan approaches to knowledge. Berkowitz says:

Such a core is at best an introduction to liberal education. Still, students who meet its requirements will acquire a common intellectual foundation that enables them to debate morals and politics responsibly, enhances their understanding of whatever specialization they choose, and enriches their appreciation of the multiple dimensions of the delightful and dangerous world in which we live….

Admittedly, reform confronts formidable obstacles. The major one is professors. Many will fight such a common core, because it requires them to teach general interest classes outside their area of expertise; it reduces opportunities to teach small boutique classes on highly specialized topics; and it presupposes that knowledge is cumulative and that some books and ideas are more essential than others.

One of the areas of conflict on campuses revolves around outside challenges to some of those professors who are particularly blatant in their partisanship in the classroom, or whose credentials and writings are particularly flaky. Some within academia resent such challenges, and countercharge that they are immune to outside criticism. A focal point is in many campuses' Middle East studies departments.

Daniel Pipes, founder of Middle East Forum and of Campus Watch, replies:

Academics criticized by Campus Watch generally respond by calling it names, caricaturing its purpose, and presenting themselves as victims, hoping thereby to render our work illegitimate. Remarkably, I recall not a single case when the meticulously documented and mildly presented work of Campus Watch has met with a serious and substantive rebuttal. So much for the marketplace of ideas….

That said, the field's basic problems remain in place: analytical failures, the mixing of politics with scholarship, intolerance of alternative views, apologetics, and the abuse of power over students….

We’ve come a long way from the ‘60’s campuses I knew, to one I don’t want to know, but must since my sons will face them, and I will financially pay heavily and our civil society sadly for that privilege. What happens on campus does not and cannot stay on campus.