In the run-up to Halloween this year at Yale University, one of the oldest and greatest of American universities, a really diverse spectrum of university administrators-- Muslim, Jew, Native American, Hispanic, Black, LGBT, among others--decided to issue guidelines to the student body on dressing up for the holiday The guidelines' apparent idea was to caution students not to use stereotypical costumes that could possibly offend others, such as feathers that might offend American Indians. In response to complaints by some students about what seemed to be heavy-handed guidelines, one Yale residential college live-in professor and his wife--both of whom teach at the university--sent an email to the students wondering whether there should actually be university guidelines for a fun holiday such as Halloween and whether guidelines don't suppress individual creativity at a university that's supposed to promote creativity and individuality.
I read both documents. Both positions were articulate and, in my judgment, certainly well within the scope of legitimate discourse.
But what happened next was the morphing of the 'guidelines' into an outdoor confrontation on the college mall between a pro-guidelines student and the professor, with the 'debate' deteriorating into the student screaming at the professor, cursing him using four-letter words, calling for his resignation, and stomping off in a great rage. Later, a petition with several hundred student signatures was submitted backing up the call to fire the pair (the professor and his wife).
I understand now that the innocuous so-called guidelines were in fact taken by some students to be an ideological statement, virtual dogma issued and distributed as rules to which other students were expected to abide. Non-compliance or contradictory opinion, according to these students, should be publicly flamed and the violator subject to consequences (as indeed were the professor and his wife). I believe that the future of the pair at the university is still in limbo. Let's remember that President Larry Summers of Harvard resigned after he made an inadvertent 'sexist' statement and President Time Wolfe of the University of Missouri resigned as well as the Chancellor over what seemed to be an inadequate response to a racial issue. Interviewed on Fox news, Harvard Professor emeritus Dershowitz noted that university administrators are afraid to confront students and speak out against student hypocrisy, double standards and blatant antisemitism, even at the City College of New York, where there are a large number of Jews.
So, has political correctness (PC), as defined by a vocal minority, become the new ideology on campus, and can PC impose its opinions on others in the name of ... well, PC? Can PC stifle free and open debate in the marketplace of ideas? Does PC supersede freedom of speech?
This is a big issue. If I cannot express my ideas freely in a university environment and have to worry about whether I may lose my job, that is a big issue. If I cannot debate someone at university (say, on the Palestinian issue) without worrying about whether I am going to be intimidated or beaten up (because 'Palestine-ism' has become PC), that is a big issue. And if PC has morphed into an ideology that stifles discussion and suppresses opposition views, then aren't we sanctioning the suppression of free speech on campus, where once it was sacrosanct? Has the university, at the behest of its students, become the enforcer of conformism of ideas where individuality once reigned supreme?
Let's take a step backward for a minute. Some years back, Prince Harry of England went to a costume party wearing a Nazi uniform, causing a tiff in the media; he subsequently apologized, and it was soon forgotten. It was a mere faux pas of a twenty-year-old kid who didn't know any better (though as a public person he should have had better advice). Was I offended back then. Not really. Would I, as a Jew, be offended if I came to a costume party and found someone dressed up as a Nazi. Perhaps, or perhaps not. I think I could manage it, After all, it's a costume party and that's what people do at costume parties. On the Jewish holiday of Purim, it is permissible for men to dress up as women even though LGBT is anathema to religious Jews. It's all a matter of proportion and context.
What should have been a simple Halloween celebration became a very big issue on campus and has revealed, for all to see, administrators refusing to lead on matters of principle and deferring to a vocal, ideologically rigid minority. Of course, the canary in the mine has been showing signs of distress for several years now. The manner in which arrogant, intimidating and, yes, violent pro-Palestinian discourse has taken over the American campuses, sometimes led by individuals who are not even students, should have been obvious to all except those who chose not to use their eyes to see.
I read both documents. Both positions were articulate and, in my judgment, certainly well within the scope of legitimate discourse.
But what happened next was the morphing of the 'guidelines' into an outdoor confrontation on the college mall between a pro-guidelines student and the professor, with the 'debate' deteriorating into the student screaming at the professor, cursing him using four-letter words, calling for his resignation, and stomping off in a great rage. Later, a petition with several hundred student signatures was submitted backing up the call to fire the pair (the professor and his wife).
I understand now that the innocuous so-called guidelines were in fact taken by some students to be an ideological statement, virtual dogma issued and distributed as rules to which other students were expected to abide. Non-compliance or contradictory opinion, according to these students, should be publicly flamed and the violator subject to consequences (as indeed were the professor and his wife). I believe that the future of the pair at the university is still in limbo. Let's remember that President Larry Summers of Harvard resigned after he made an inadvertent 'sexist' statement and President Time Wolfe of the University of Missouri resigned as well as the Chancellor over what seemed to be an inadequate response to a racial issue. Interviewed on Fox news, Harvard Professor emeritus Dershowitz noted that university administrators are afraid to confront students and speak out against student hypocrisy, double standards and blatant antisemitism, even at the City College of New York, where there are a large number of Jews.
So, has political correctness (PC), as defined by a vocal minority, become the new ideology on campus, and can PC impose its opinions on others in the name of ... well, PC? Can PC stifle free and open debate in the marketplace of ideas? Does PC supersede freedom of speech?
This is a big issue. If I cannot express my ideas freely in a university environment and have to worry about whether I may lose my job, that is a big issue. If I cannot debate someone at university (say, on the Palestinian issue) without worrying about whether I am going to be intimidated or beaten up (because 'Palestine-ism' has become PC), that is a big issue. And if PC has morphed into an ideology that stifles discussion and suppresses opposition views, then aren't we sanctioning the suppression of free speech on campus, where once it was sacrosanct? Has the university, at the behest of its students, become the enforcer of conformism of ideas where individuality once reigned supreme?
Let's take a step backward for a minute. Some years back, Prince Harry of England went to a costume party wearing a Nazi uniform, causing a tiff in the media; he subsequently apologized, and it was soon forgotten. It was a mere faux pas of a twenty-year-old kid who didn't know any better (though as a public person he should have had better advice). Was I offended back then. Not really. Would I, as a Jew, be offended if I came to a costume party and found someone dressed up as a Nazi. Perhaps, or perhaps not. I think I could manage it, After all, it's a costume party and that's what people do at costume parties. On the Jewish holiday of Purim, it is permissible for men to dress up as women even though LGBT is anathema to religious Jews. It's all a matter of proportion and context.
What should have been a simple Halloween celebration became a very big issue on campus and has revealed, for all to see, administrators refusing to lead on matters of principle and deferring to a vocal, ideologically rigid minority. Of course, the canary in the mine has been showing signs of distress for several years now. The manner in which arrogant, intimidating and, yes, violent pro-Palestinian discourse has taken over the American campuses, sometimes led by individuals who are not even students, should have been obvious to all except those who chose not to use their eyes to see.
No comments:
Post a Comment