This is at once a chilling report, and one that strikes me, oddly, as almost understated. The problem has been going on for decades. I am one of the casualties, having been run out of a tenured position for not having the correct opinions over 20 years ago. The selection pressures on those wishing to become academics are extreme, and I'm actually surprised it's possible to find anyone on campus these days who thinks they can speak their mind or teach exactly what they want without risking repercussions. After all, the vast majority did not get where they are in an era of merit. Merit disappeared – especially in the humanities and social sciences – more than a generation ago. That doesn't mean that there aren't fine scholars on campuses today. But it means there's something inherently skewed about the selection sample in a study such as this.
"[S]o effectually had the tyranny and the antiquity of habit established itself over the mind" that "reason was considered as rebellion; and the slavery of fear had made men afraid to think." "Freedom" in such world was mere prey to be "hunted."
I won't argue the point of the essay. Just not feeling a lot of sympathy or outrage on behalf of the self-censored professoriat, maybe holding back on their daily rant.
“And the pressures on campus speech keep intensifying, particularly from government actors.”
This otherwise very good piece continues to propagate the utter lie that campus censorship now comes primarily from government. It is based on a single “damn lies” dishonest counting of censorship incidents that a clearly leftist-motivated person or persons in FIRE deliberately twisted to come to the false conclusion they wanted to come to, which began in the “vibe about campus censorship” piece that FIRE refuses to correct.
It is an utter disgrace that FIRE continues to propagate this lie. Each time it does it further undercuts FIRE’s credibility as non-partisan.
"This otherwise very good piece continues to propagate the utter lie that campus censorship now comes primarily from government."
You apparently have not followed the news, starting with the Trump administration's cutting off federal funds from Harvard unless/until it forbade any criticism of Israel by students. It's true that not ALL censorship on college campuses is driven by government pressure, but it's fair to say that, with its recent intrusions, the government is the primary driver of the death of free exchange there.
I’m not defending all of the things Trump has done. I defend some, not others.
I’m not suggesting there is NO bad government censorship on campus. I am saying that FIRE’s claims here re: where most of the censorship is coming are based on b.s. statistics. Which you can easily go read yourself.
So no, I reject your claim that it is “the” primary driver of the death of free exchange there.
Just as Greg would. And has, repeatedly said.
Yes, there is more from the right now and from the government right than there was previously (have you already forgotten the censorship from the government left?). And that’s bad. But the idea that it’s remotely close to half just doesn’t hold up to reality.
I want to push the meme that only cowards are frightened of speech they don't like: anyone who is secure in his beliefs has no need to fear the expression of opposing views, and is content to answer them with reason, not hysteria or force.
This is at once a chilling report, and one that strikes me, oddly, as almost understated. The problem has been going on for decades. I am one of the casualties, having been run out of a tenured position for not having the correct opinions over 20 years ago. The selection pressures on those wishing to become academics are extreme, and I'm actually surprised it's possible to find anyone on campus these days who thinks they can speak their mind or teach exactly what they want without risking repercussions. After all, the vast majority did not get where they are in an era of merit. Merit disappeared – especially in the humanities and social sciences – more than a generation ago. That doesn't mean that there aren't fine scholars on campuses today. But it means there's something inherently skewed about the selection sample in a study such as this.
This piece reminds me of Thomas Paine in The Rights of Man (https://www.ushistory.org/Paine/rights/b2-intr.htm)
"[S]o effectually had the tyranny and the antiquity of habit established itself over the mind" that "reason was considered as rebellion; and the slavery of fear had made men afraid to think." "Freedom" in such world was mere prey to be "hunted."
I won't argue the point of the essay. Just not feeling a lot of sympathy or outrage on behalf of the self-censored professoriat, maybe holding back on their daily rant.
“And the pressures on campus speech keep intensifying, particularly from government actors.”
This otherwise very good piece continues to propagate the utter lie that campus censorship now comes primarily from government. It is based on a single “damn lies” dishonest counting of censorship incidents that a clearly leftist-motivated person or persons in FIRE deliberately twisted to come to the false conclusion they wanted to come to, which began in the “vibe about campus censorship” piece that FIRE refuses to correct.
It is an utter disgrace that FIRE continues to propagate this lie. Each time it does it further undercuts FIRE’s credibility as non-partisan.
"This otherwise very good piece continues to propagate the utter lie that campus censorship now comes primarily from government."
You apparently have not followed the news, starting with the Trump administration's cutting off federal funds from Harvard unless/until it forbade any criticism of Israel by students. It's true that not ALL censorship on college campuses is driven by government pressure, but it's fair to say that, with its recent intrusions, the government is the primary driver of the death of free exchange there.
I’m not defending all of the things Trump has done. I defend some, not others.
I’m not suggesting there is NO bad government censorship on campus. I am saying that FIRE’s claims here re: where most of the censorship is coming are based on b.s. statistics. Which you can easily go read yourself.
So no, I reject your claim that it is “the” primary driver of the death of free exchange there.
Just as Greg would. And has, repeatedly said.
Yes, there is more from the right now and from the government right than there was previously (have you already forgotten the censorship from the government left?). And that’s bad. But the idea that it’s remotely close to half just doesn’t hold up to reality.
I want to push the meme that only cowards are frightened of speech they don't like: anyone who is secure in his beliefs has no need to fear the expression of opposing views, and is content to answer them with reason, not hysteria or force.