More on the Lack of Ideological Diversity on College Campuses, Part I

In my 5/19/16 post I discussed how liberal commentator Nicholas Kristof, who writes for the NY Times, wrote an opinion piece in the paper about the Left's dominance on college campuses. One Columbia Law School professor, Professor William Simon, took issue with Mr.Kristof, and his letter to the Times, along with my email exchange with him, formed the basis of the last two-part post.

Others, however, have agreed with Mr. Kristof, and some of their comments are worth noting. The 5/13/16 Wall Street Journal had an article entitled "Why Free Speech Matters on Campus" by an unlikely pair - the liberal billionaire Michael Bloomberg, former NYC Mayor and founder of Bloomberg LP, and the conservative billionaire Charles Koch, chairman and CEO of Koch Industries.

Said the two: "Across America, college campuses are increasingly sanctioning so-called "safe spaces," "speech codes," "trigger warnings," "microaggressions," and the withdrawal of invitations to controversial speakers. By doing so, colleges are creating a climate of intellectual conformity that discourages open inquiry, debate and true learning." But who qualifies as a controversial speaker?

Apparently, anyone who worked in the foreign policy arena of the Federal government is unacceptable as a speaker. In a 5/10/16 editorial, the LA Times notes that former Secretary of State and Ambassador to the UN, the liberal Madeleine Albright, was an unacceptable speaker at Scripps College. Scripps is a small liberal arts college for women in Claremont, California. It was not just the allegation by students that Albright has "blood on her hands." According to the Times, 28 faculty members sent an open letter promising to boycott commencement ceremonies if Albright was speaking.

Said the boycotting faculty members: "...we should promote the advancement of women and transgender peoples broadly and not simply emulate and celebrate those individuals who participate in U.S. state power and wield its violence." Basically, what we have are leftist professors who have no particular feelings for the greatest country on earth. Do our leaders wield armies that engage in violence? Yes, but most often to combat violence by others. And these professors object to those who wield state power. But I doubt they are anarchists. I suspect many are socialists and Marxists who would have no problem seeing state power exercised according to their ideology.

But good for the LA Times in giving their own advice to the graduates: "Don't be so damn sensitive. Don't be so sure you're right. Don't be so quick to silence those who have a different point of view than your own."

Back to Messrs. Bloomberg and Koch. After noting how college students have been given the power to shut down and prevent speech they oppose and claim as harmful, the two said this: "We believe this new dynamic, which is doing a terrible disservice to students, threatens not only the future of higher education, but also the very fabric of a free and democratic society." That bears repeating. The leftist mentality on college campuses is threatening the "very fabric of a free and democratic society." Blooomberg and Koch are expressing an idea that is completely opposed to Professor Simon's idea that certain views are "legitimately disfavored" in academia.

Bloomberg and Koch continued: "The purpose of a college education isn't to reaffirm students' beliefs, it is to challenge, expand and refine them - and to send students into the world with minds that are open and questioning, not closed and self-righteous." I could not agree more. But the fabric of our society has already been negatively impacted by leftist control of our colleges and universities.