More On:
free speech
The IRS’ persecution of a Christian nonprofit should terrify all of us
Biden to ban good showers and other commentary
Facebook is the world’s largest publisher — and that should terrify us all
NJ woman ordered to remove ‘F–k Biden’ lawn signs — or face $250 daily fines
From the moment I stepped foot on campus at NYU three years ago, I’ve been taught that there is right-think and wrong-think. Everywhere I look, professors, administrators and peers all fervently parrot the same beliefs.
I have sat through orientation events that were highly politicized, assuming “community values” of radical progressivism — values I don’t share.
On the first day of the semester, a professor blatantly disparaged conservative politicians and their supporters as uneducated and ignorant. Even Mayor de Blasio intervened in October of 2018 to prevent right-wing provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos from speaking to a class of about 25 freshmen about political correctness after the campus erupted in outrage and Antifa threatened to shut down the event.
My experience is not unique. Across the nation, professors are espousing their own views at the lectern and thrusting politicized curricula upon students, teaching them what to think rather than how to think. Meanwhile, speech codes, safe spaces, trigger warnings and the conflation of speech with violence have all had a discernibly chilling effect on campus discourse. NYU identification cards even prominently display a bias report hotline to report any instances of offense. The resulting fear of saying the wrong thing or being behind on the latest political lingo is palpable.
Professors around the country now record their lectures as a safeguard against accusations of bias. Others provide exhaustive trigger warnings about anything that could be construed as even vaguely controversial. Students preface their points with, “I don’t mean to be offensive, but …” (for the record, they almost never are).
Today’s students recoil at the first hint of contention and demand insulation from controversial ideas. But, in the process of bubble-wrapping themselves, they undermine the very purpose of their education: the exploration of self that is paramount to intellectual maturity.
Nonetheless, the movement to squash dissent is gaining steam. A 2021 survey found that 76 percent of liberal students believe peers who say something they deem offensive should be reported to the university. Eighty-five percent insist professors who offend should be disciplined, too.
As a political independent, this culture has left me feeling isolated and intellectually stifled. As a result, I began a fellowship at FIRE, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, researching free speech controversies in academia. I analyze complaint letters from students and faculty across the nation who feel their rights have been violated. They reach out by the hundreds monthly.
Meanwhile, as it has become clear to others that I am an unabashed believer in free speech, people have started coming out of the woodwork to express their support. To my surprise, complete strangers, former classmates, concerned professors and even dormitory neighbors said they feel the same as me. They had been in silent agreement all along.
Most of these conversations are prefaced with, “I’m scared to admit it, but …” and end with something along the lines of “… please don’t tell anybody.” Saddest of all: “I want to speak out like you, but I have a parent who works in academia. I’m afraid it could jeopardize their career.”
All around me, students and even faculty are going along to get along, ducking controversy, and toeing the political line. After all, their social lives, grades, letters of recommendation and even careers all hang in the balance.
This frightening climate has led to a crisis of self-censorship. This isn’t just my anecdotal hunch. Statistics reveal that there really is a silenced plurality, if not majority, across campuses nationwide. In fact, a 2020 survey revealed that nearly two-thirds of students feel the academic climate prevents them from expressing their beliefs.
The purpose of the university is to serve as a congregation point for the brightest minds, where diverse perspectives meet in colorful debate. Central to that dynamic is ideological difference.
Instead, self-identified liberal students paradoxically uphold illiberalism on campus by shutting down alternative ideas in pursuit of ideological safety. These “conformists” are going unchallenged, while “nonconformists” are intimidated into compliance.
Silent acquiescence is no longer tenable. When two-thirds of America’s college students are afraid to speak their minds, they are truly facing a tyranny of the minority. We cannot continue to bow down to ideological authoritarians. The integrity of free minds hangs in the balance.
I’m doing my part by speaking out for those who feel silenced. Now I hope to inspire others to do the same. There is strength in numbers. We must stand up now in defense of intellectual honesty, and, ultimately, personal integrity.
Rikki Schlott is a 21-year-old junior at NYU.
Share this article:
Source: Read Full Article
