|
Jewish World Review March 23, 2001/ 27 Adar, 5761
Marianne M. Jennings
http://www.jewishworldreview.com --
HIGHER education has long been guilty of conduct unbecoming of the
syllogism. Not content with negative obedience to the principles of PC, the
Sadducees of multiculturalism eliminate the negativity: "I teach, therefore
I censor."
The result is the successful indoctrination of an entire generation. Witness
the youthful Silicon Valley Moguls who are completely dependent upon
conservative notions of intellectual property rights and capital investment
for their success and survival yet consistently donate to liberal candidates
who bang the Lexus drum to tax them mightily. They see no connection between
conservative doctrines and their economic freedom.
Submission to sloppy orthodoxy and platitudes of PC has clicked along with
little opposition. Once every so many moons (a tip of the hat to
multiculturalism), sunshine, albeit through a depleted ozone courtesy of
fabricated global warming science, descends upon the academy's practices to
disinfect and the public is aghast.
Such a break in the inclement weather for campus conservatives came last week
when news broke that David Horowitz's ad on the ten reasons reparations for
slavery are wrong was rejected by campus newspapers or resulted in scores of
apologies and general repentance when it did run. It is one thing for campus
newspapers to run ads for Hooters and keggers, but political activism crosses
the line, partner.
While it is lovely to have the public with us renegades who fight campus
daftness daily, their outrage is misdirected and too little too late. The
outrage should not arise from refusals or apologies but rather because the
only way the contra case to slavery reparations can make its way into campus
discourse is through an ad.
The public should be focused on the question, "Why aren't you
discussing reparations?" Lack of a meaningful dialogue on any PC topic is
accepted in higher ed. Indeed, a letter from Berkeley's assistant chancellor
to Mr. Horowitz stated, ""Although your advertisement purported to be a
response to claims made for reparations for slavery, there has been no active
discussion of such claims on this campus prior to your advertisement. No
demand for 'dialogue' existed prior to your efforts to provoke it." An
administrator states with pride that no one wanted a dialogue? How courses
in law, history, ethics, economics, anthropology and political science could
not trigger such discussions staggers the imagination.
But those charged with the discovery of ideas in society have not fostered
imagination. Those in the academy have suppressed imagination by arresting
the inner minds of their charges with inviolate PC hype.
Higher education is no longer the birthplace of ideas. Blatant hypocrisy
passes without objection. When our vote-counting former VP began his
teaching career at Columbia University this year, not only were outsiders
excluded, the students had to pledge not to reveal what they learned from his
Goreishness. Does a gag order in a journalism class strike no one as odd?
Then again, Columbia is home to a sexual harassment policy that would make
Genghis Khan blush. Harassers are declared guilty and punished without the
right to confront their accusers. Such practices give communism a bad name
yet those who have opposed the Columbia policy have been called "would-be
sexual assailants."
Even a cursory look at the curricula of universities is disturbing.
Multiculturalism, not math, not language and certainly not spirituality, is
now virtually a universal requirement for a degree. Students worship the
pagan god of diversity. Sixty-four credit hours into her college education,
my oldest daughter has read the work of one white male-Mark Twain, who, she
has been told, was a racist.
In my own course on business ethics I require a book by white male Michael
Novak on business and society. As a philosopher making the case for
capitalism, he charts new territory. I have students who refuse to read the
book. Others take offense. One student threw the book away after three
chapters, so great was her umbrage.
That they oppose capitalism is not news. That they are offended by free
enterprise is hardly surprising. What is stunning is that graduate students
are so molded by higher ed censorship that they feel justified in refusing to
read an opposing view.
That it takes an ad in a college newspaper to even raise the voice of
opposition should be demoralizing to those who value independent thought and
its role in preserving democracy. The roots of freedom wither away courtesy
of the institutions we support through tax dollars and tuition. While I
appreciate the public outrage over Horowitz, the problems in higher education
run much deeper, right down to the roots, at least what's left of them. And
I do mean
03/15/01: Columbine redux: Moral infants
|