Political correctness inside Universities

We have seen corrosive political correctness at work inside Auckland University where a European culture group was bullied into shutting down with death threats and threats of violence. The University was hostile towards the group from the start and declared them guilty of racism and fascism until they could prove themselves innocent. The incident revealed the tip of the iceberg as it is symptomatic of an underlying, suffocating culture where conservative voices and white students are silenced not just here in New Zealand but on American and other University campuses too.

..The flesh-eating bacterium of political correctness…which has become endemic on elite college campuses

…the persistent attempt to suppress the expression of unwelcome beliefs and ideas.

…I had one student, from a Chinese-American family, who informed me that the first thing she learned when she got to college was to keep quiet about her Christian faith and her non-feminist views about marriage. I had another student, a self-described ?strong feminist,? who told me that she tends to keep quiet about everything, because she never knows when she might say something that you?re not supposed to. I had a third student, a junior, who wrote about a friend whom she had known since the beginning of college and who, she?d just discovered, went to church every Sunday. My student hadn?t even been aware that her friend was religious. When she asked her why she had concealed this essential fact about herself, her friend replied, ?Because I don?t feel comfortable being out as a religious person here.?

I also heard that the director of the writing center, a specialist in disability studies, was informing people that they couldn?t use expressions like ?that?s a crazy idea? because they stigmatize the mentally ill. I heard a young woman tell me that she had been criticized by a fellow student for wearing moccasins?an act, she was informed, of cultural appropriation. I heard an adjunct instructor describe how a routine…conflict over something he had said in class had turned, when the student in question claimed to have felt ?triggered,? into, in his words, a bureaucratic ?dumpster fire.? He was careful now, he added, to avoid saying anything, or teaching anything, that might conceivably lead to trouble.

I listened to students?young women, again, who considered themselves strong feminists?talk about how they were afraid to speak freely among their peers, and how despite its notoriety as a platform for cyberbullying, they were grateful for YikYak, the social media app, because it allowed them to say anonymously what they couldn?t say in their own name. Above all, I heard my students tell me that while they generally identified with the sentiments and norms that travel under the name of political correctness, they thought that it had simply gone too far?way too far. Everybody felt oppressed, as they put it, by the ?PC police?
…That, by the way, is why liberal students (and liberals in general) are so bad at defending their own positions. They never have to, so they never learn to. That is also why it tends to be so easy for conservatives to goad them into incoherent anger. Nothing makes you more enraged than an argument you cannot answer. But the reason to listen to people who disagree with you is not so you can learn to refute them. The reason is that you may be wrong. In fact, you are wrong: about some things and probably about a lot of things. There is zero percent chance that any one of us is 100 percent correct. That, in turn, is why freedom of expression includes the right to hear as well as speak, and why disinviting campus speakers abridges the speech rights of students as well as of the speakers themselves.

…Unlike the campus protesters of the 1960s, today?s student activists are not expressing countercultural views. They are expressing the exact views of the culture in which they find themselves (a reason that administrators prove so ready to accede to their demands). If you want to find the counterculture on today?s elite college campuses, you need to look for the conservative students.

…But the most effective form of censorship, of course, is self-censorship?which, in the intimate environment of a residential college, young adults are very quick to learn. One of the students at Whitman mentioned that he?s careful, when questioning consensus beliefs, to phrase his opinion in terms of ?Explain to me why I?m wrong.? Other students? at Bard College, at the Claremont Colleges?have explained that any challenge to the hegemony of identity politics will get you branded as a racist (as in, ?Don?t talk to that guy, he?s a racist?). Campus protesters, their frequent rhetoric to the contrary notwithstanding, are not the ones being silenced: they are, after all, not being silent. They are in the middle of the quad, speaking their minds. The ones being silenced are the ones like my students at Scripps, like the students at Whitman, like many students, no doubt, at many places, who are keeping their mouths shut.

…What I have heard, frequently, for as long as I have been involved in academia, are open expressions of contempt or prejudice or hostility against those suspect groups or members of those groups. If you are a white man, you are routinely regarded as guilty until proven innocent, the worst possible construction is put upon your words, and anything you say on a sensitive issue is received with suspicion at best.

…I am perfectly aware that men, whites, heterosexuals, and cisgendered people remain the dominant groups in society as a whole. But equality is not revenge.

…Political correctness creates a mindset of us versus them. ?Them? is white men, or straight cisgendered white men?a.k.a. ?the patriarchy.?

…It has long struck me in leftist or PC rhetoric how often ?white? is conflated with ?wealthy,? as if all white people were wealthy and all wealthy people were white. In fact, more than 40 percent of poor Americans are white.

…Political correctness and rational discourse are incompatible ideals.

… Free expression is an absolute; to balance it is to destroy it.

… Once you start to ban offensive speech, there is no logical place to stop

…When a speaker is invited to campus, it means that some set of people within the institution?some department, center, committee, or student organization?wants to hear what they have to say. When they are disinvited, shouted down, or otherwise prevented from speaking, it means another set has proved to be more powerful.

When the latter are accused of opposing free speech, they invariably respond, ?How can we be opposed to free speech? We are exercising it right now!? But everyone is in favor of their own free speech (including, for instance, Vladimir Putin). The test of your commitment to free speech as a general principle is whether you are willing to tolerate the speech of others, especially those with whom you most disagree. If you are using your speech to try to silence speech, you are not in favor of free speech. You are only in favor of yourself.