It’s easy for college officials to pay lip service to freedom of speech. The question is whether they mean it.
In today’s Martin Center article, Duke University professor John Staddon argues that they often don’t. He writes:
Thirteen college presidents, including those of Duke, Cornell, and Rutgers, have signed on to the “Campus Call for Free Expression” (CCFE), a project organized by a low-profile Princeton-and-Woodrow-Wilson-related group called the Institute for Citizens & Scholars.
Though the move has been celebrated in outlets as dissimilar as Inside Higher Ed and Forbes, I’m afraid it looks like a silly “Well, okay then, I guess I’ll sign on,” limp-wristed, toothless, and redundant exercise rather than a serious effort to get universities back on track.
Why the skepticism, professor? Because the officials have shown themselves to be spineless when faced with demands from leftist students and faculty to cancel speakers they dislike. Rutgers is a case in point. As Staddon shows, “Yet Rutgers, not too long ago, cancelled a speech by one invited woman — Lisa Daftari, accused of Islamophobia — and allowed another, Condoleezza Rice, to back out because students protested. What does Rutgers propose to do to avoid such embarrassments in the future? The president’s 35-word statement is unlikely to stem the tide of progressive sanctimoniousness that continues to flow through that university.”
College officials would rather do almost anything than confront outraged academic mobs demanding that someone be disinvited or defenestrated for having the wrong ideas.
Staddon nails it here: “The problem requires action, not thought. The issue is simple: Many students (74 percent by a recent report) think it is fine for the university to censor not just opinions but factual claims with which they disagree. What are college presidents going to do about that?”
I think we know the answer.