I am no fan of political correctness. I am a devotee of
freedom of speech.
That said, I will doubtlessly draw a host of disagreement
with this blog.
What I want to say here is simply this: an educational
institution should have the mission of educating its students. Educating – from
the Latin e duco, means leading out. Specifically, it means leading the
students out of the darkness of ignorance into the bright light of knowledge.
It means teaching. It means training. Education is more than
simply transmitting knowledge. It involves instilling discipline, developing
habits of thought, or action, and yes, of speech.
Americans have the constitutionally protected right of free
speech. They do not have a constitutionally protected right to attend any
particular institution of higher education.
There is nothing in the law to prevent a college or
University from imposing discipline on its students, It can require them to
wear uniforms. It can require them to sing the school alma mater, recite the
pledge of allegiance, memorize the Gettysburg Address or the ten commandments.
A college or University may require its students to address
its faculty with respect, refrain from cursing, dressing inappropriately, and
yes, engaging in politically incorrect discourse.
There is no reason why a college or University could not ban
the use of George Carlin’s ten words you can’t say on television anywhere on
campus, and no reason why it cannot ban racial slurs by its students or
faculty.
It short, there is nothing in the Constitution of the United
States which forbids an institution of higher education from purveying the full
measure of higher education, such that
its graduates will not only know things like history, literature, science and
psychology, but will be trained to speak and act and think like a truly mature,
cultured and civilized human being.
All of which is not to say that colleges and Universities
are required to be operated like finishing schools. Indeed, most public
Universities are committed to a kind of open ended freedom of thought and
expression which is based upon the relativist notion that there is no such
thing as absolute truth, and right or wrong are entirely personal opinions that
each student is expected to divine for him or her self before receiving a
diploma.
Given that kind of a mission statement, it is difficult for
the academic administration to impose, retroactively or selectively, specific
restrictions on speech or conduct.
Especially so when the ban is imposed at the request of an
objecting minority.
Example: A college declines to ban a showing of The Vagina
Monologues based on the objection of evangelical Christian students to its libertine
message, but is then asked to ban the same movie by transvestites who take
personal offense at its content.
Unhappily, much of the discord on college campuses has
political overtones. It is not really about free speech so much as it is about
who is in charge.
Experience tells us that radical political change is often
incubated on college campuses. Certainly campuses were the battlegrounds of
dissent and protest during the Viet Nam War. College students like to chant in
unison. They do it at football and basketball games and they do it on the lawn
in front of the President or the Chancellor’s house.
There is a certain bravado that comes with solidarity. And
solidarity is easier to achieve when condemning a person than when cheering for
an idea.
How many “discussions” of issues on the Internet quickly
dissolve into name calling. Young people who have not been imbued with a sense
of propriety are especially quick to resort to ad hominem argument.
And let’s face it, “I respectfully disagree with your major
premise” is not as much fun to say as “Yo Mama wears soldier boots.”
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.