The Corner

Strange New Respectability?

Don’t you hate when someone you have safely pigeonholed as a lefty academic jerk turns out be more complicated and thoughtful than seemed apparent?

Stanley Fish, the former head of Duke University’s notoriously post-modern, “anti-foundationalist” (trash the cannon and the dead white guy lit) English Department in the 1990s, had a fascinating column (Times Select warning) on the New York Times blog yesterday. (Which I admit that I read, from time to time.)

The headline that lured me was “Clarence Thomas Is Right.” I assumed, naturally, that that meant the opposite of what it said, and that it would be another, tired “he’s a right wing moron” rant from Professor Fish, who is a scholar of literature and law. But I had something important to avoid, so I clicked on it.  Lo and behold I found a stunningly adamant, articulate defense of Clarence Thomas’s concurring opinion in the recent Supreme Court case Morse v. Frederick, (Bong Hits 4 Jesus to you).

Professor Fish, a card carrying deconstructionist liberal progressive whatever, made clear that he thought Justice Roberts’ majority opinion did not go far enough in making the crucial case against freedom of speech in public schools. Roberts ruled that the school has the right to preclude speech that advocates the use of illegal drugs. In his concurrence, Thomas rejects the idea that schoolchildren have any First Amendment rights at all, a point he defends both in principle and historically.

Fish writes “If I had a criticism of Thomas, it would be that he does not go far enough. Not only do students not have first amendment rights, they do not have any rights….(Educational institutions)…are pedagogical contexts and the imperatives that rule them are the imperatives of pedagogy — the mastery of materials and the acquiring of analytical skills. “

To be sure, conservatives wrote similar things when the decision came down, and many cited Thomas’s opinion as a classic in the making. But for a lib to write this, seriously, for a New York Times audience is a whole ‘nuther kettle of fish.  As of last night, NYT readers, btw, had provided close to 300 dissenting e-mails, when 20 is a more typical number of responses.

Before we offer Fish a version of the Strange New Respectability award, however, it is worth wondering whether his view stems from true reverence for education, or a desire to have no dissent allowed when lefty faculties ram PC opinion down students’ throats.

Most Popular

Film & TV

Knives Out Takes On the Anti-Immigration Crowd

Since the beginning of the Obama era, the Left has broadcast two contradictory messages on the subjects of race and immigration. The first is that a so-called Coalition of the Ascendant will inevitably displace white Americans as the dominant force in the country’s politics and culture. The second is that ... Read More
Film & TV

Knives Out Takes On the Anti-Immigration Crowd

Since the beginning of the Obama era, the Left has broadcast two contradictory messages on the subjects of race and immigration. The first is that a so-called Coalition of the Ascendant will inevitably displace white Americans as the dominant force in the country’s politics and culture. The second is that ... Read More
From left: Harvard University's Noah Feldman, Stanford University's Pamela Karlan, University of North Carolina's Michael Gerhardt, and George Washington University's Jonathan Turley testify before the House Judiciary Committee hearing on the impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump, December 4, 2019.

The Impeachment Eye Test

To put it mildly, the 1960s were not notorious for juridical modesty. They might compare favorably, though, to Wednesday’s episode of “The Lawyer Left Does Impeachment” at the House Judiciary Committee. Oh, I have no doubt that the three progressive constitutional scholars spotlighted by Democrats yearn in ... Read More
From left: Harvard University's Noah Feldman, Stanford University's Pamela Karlan, University of North Carolina's Michael Gerhardt, and George Washington University's Jonathan Turley testify before the House Judiciary Committee hearing on the impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump, December 4, 2019.

The Impeachment Eye Test

To put it mildly, the 1960s were not notorious for juridical modesty. They might compare favorably, though, to Wednesday’s episode of “The Lawyer Left Does Impeachment” at the House Judiciary Committee. Oh, I have no doubt that the three progressive constitutional scholars spotlighted by Democrats yearn in ... Read More
Culture

The Absurd Crusade against the Salvation Army

We all know some individuals who are so obviously good and kind that we are certain if anyone were to dislike them, that's all we would need to know about the person. We would immediately assume he or she is a bad person. To hate the manifestly good is a sure sign of being bad. Such is the case regarding the ... Read More
Culture

The Absurd Crusade against the Salvation Army

We all know some individuals who are so obviously good and kind that we are certain if anyone were to dislike them, that's all we would need to know about the person. We would immediately assume he or she is a bad person. To hate the manifestly good is a sure sign of being bad. Such is the case regarding the ... Read More
White House

Nancy Pelosi’s Case

Further to the post below, a couple of thoughts on Nancy Pelosi’s statement yesterday. She said this near the beginning: During the constitutional convention, James Madison, the architect of the Constitution, warned that a president might betray his trust to foreign powers which might prove fatal to the ... Read More
White House

Nancy Pelosi’s Case

Further to the post below, a couple of thoughts on Nancy Pelosi’s statement yesterday. She said this near the beginning: During the constitutional convention, James Madison, the architect of the Constitution, warned that a president might betray his trust to foreign powers which might prove fatal to the ... Read More