Steven Glick: Students, Not JustControversial Speakers, Are Silenced Too
Without free speech, even a college degree does not ensure an education.
5.1.2017
7
Heather Mac Donald made national news when protesters blocked her planned live talk at Claremont McKenna College, forcing her to deliver a shortened version via live stream instead. Charles Murray, Ben Shapiro, Ann Coulter and many others have recently faced similar problems after receiving invitations to speak on college campuses.
While students’ proclivity to prevent controversial speakers from sharing their message is concerning, what’s even more concerning is these students’ inclination to censor their own peers.
It’s not just high-profile speakers who are stifled through threats and intimidation: We students are silenced as well.
When I arrived on campus, I was immediately introduced to a new set of rules for social etiquette.
One of my first days at school, I referred to myself as a “freshman.” An older student overheard my conversation, and told me I should instead call myself a “first year,” as “freshman” is a gendered term and could be offensive to my classmates.
I was taught that white people shouldn’t listen to rap music because it’s cultural appropriation and could be offensive to my classmates. And so, to avoid social ostracism, the other freshmen and I dutifully changed the words we used so as not to offend: Introduce yourself with your name and gender pronouns; don’t call people “African American,” call them “Black”; use “queer” instead of “gay”; “differently abled” rather than “disabled” or “handicapped”; “Latinx,” not “Latino”; “womyn,” not “woman”; “you all,” not “you guys”; and never, ever ask someone, “Where are you from?”
As it turns out, almost anything could be offensive to my classmates: mad scientists,yachts, cupcakes, Speedos, dreamcatchers, hoop earrings, the Food Network, even America. Ultimately, I got fed up with the safe-space culture that dominates all activities on campus.
I began writing for the Claremont Independent — a student-run conservative paper at the Claremont Colleges — and became a vocal opponent of political correctness.
My classmates — as well as my former employer on campus — grew upset with my coverage of the over-the-top PC-policing and began to think up ways to silence me. I was frequently reported to the deans, and a petition even circulated asking the administration to expel me and my staff.
Part of what makes this culture so troubling is the number of double standards it engenders. “Marginalized” students perversely pursue “equality” by pulling groups perceived as privileged down. “Privileged” students are chastised for committing “microaggressions” against their marginalized peers, while marginalized students are free to commit blatant acts of racial or gender bias against those they deem privileged.
This behavior is excused because, in college, the definition of racism or sexism is “power plus prejudice.” Under this definition, only whites are capable of racism and men capable of sexism, because white men are the group in our country who are considered to hold relative power. As a result, any vengeful or discriminatory actions taken against white men are excusable because of their “privilege,” while any malicious acts (or even pointed questioning) directed at members of minority groups or women are labeled racist or sexist.
That’s true both outside and inside the classroom. The faculty at Pomona is incredibly unbalanced ideologically. Unsurprisingly, the curriculums are severely biased with dissenting views unwelcome. The number of class offerings shrinks dramatically for anyone unwilling to fully toe the progressive line. Several of my friends and I decide which classes to take based not on the course content or reading material, but instead based solely on which professors seem least likely to let political or racial biases affect classroom discussion and grading.
Two weeks ago, I tried to produce a video in which my peers would explain their opposition to Heather Mac Donald and describe the reasons they did not believe she should be allowed to speak on campus.
I stayed at the protest for nearly an hour, talking to as many students as I could. But students involved in the protest refused to answer any of my questions. Instead, they blocked my camera, pushed me and formed a wall around me to restrict my movement.
Following the Mac Donald debacle, school leaders once again stressed their commitment to “the exercise of free speech and academic freedom.” But what exactly does that commitment mean in 2017?
While national figures such as Heather Mac Donald have large audiences (online and otherwise) to ensure their opinions are heard, the same is not true for most students on campus.
What measures does a college take to ensure that all of its students have the opportunity to speak, to disagree, and to learn from opposing viewpoints, regardless of their sociodemographic characteristics?
And more importantly, since what schools are doing now clearly isn’t working, what measures are colleges willing to take going forward?
Most would agree that the exchange of competing ideas is the quintessential aspect of a liberal arts education. Unfortunately, it seems that such discussions are a relic of the past.
But it doesn’t have to be this way. Censorious radicals are loud, but they are not the majority, and theirs are not the only opinions that need to be heard.
It’s time for students to insist on free speech on our campuses. Because without free speech, even a college degree does not ensure an education.
Steven Glick is a senior majoring in economics at Pomona College and the editor in chief of the Claremont Independent, a magazine covering the colleges in Claremont, Calif. He is also the nephew of Freedom Center's Caroline Glick. Here he writes his opinion about what he calls a college “educashun.”
Posts
