Why Future Juan Williamses Will Be Fired, As George Mason Rolls Over In His Grave

College speech codes are the American Left’s special shame, and it the time for them to go the way of parietal hours and mandatory chapel attendance is overdue. There are monstrosities of thought control in schools across the nation, but those in state universities are especially offensive and ominous, since they are in slam-dunk defiance of the First Amendment prohibiting government restrictions on speech. As Barton Hinkle notes in an eye-opening piece in the Richmond Times-Dispatch, not only are state schools stomping on free speech, state schools dedicated to the legacy on the men who wrote the First Amendment are doing it. If there is anything more unethical  than educators stifling thought and the expression of it, that would be it.

Hinkle’s article focuses on speech codes at Virginia codes and universities, and the news isn’t all bad. The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), an organization dedicated to protecting free speech on campus recently gave an award to the university founded by Thomas Jefferson, the University of Virginia. There was a time when UVA embraced speech codes, but no more. Also winning praise from FIRE is Jefferson’s alma mater, William & Mary, meaning that Virginia has two of the thirteen colleges in the nation—that’s thirteen out of 2,363 four year colleges—that respect the First Amendment enough to follow it as well as teach it.

That would make the Virginia Founding Fathers proud, but then there is the dark side. Virginia’s James Madison University, for example,  insists that “free speech and peaceful assemblies must be registered with Madison Union Scheduling at least 48 hours in advance.”  That’s right: you have to get advance permission to engage in “free speech.”  The Constitution’s author, Virginian James Madison, is doing barrel rolls in his vault over this desecration of his legacy by the school bearing his name, but fellow Virginian and Founding Father George Mason must be doing post-mortem backflips. The university named in honor of the man who got the Bill of Rights incorporated into Madison’s document maintains a speech code that prohibits “any form of bigotry . . . . whether verbal, written, psychological, direct, or implied.”

Anyone who has followed the intense political debates over the past year knows what that means…or could mean. Opposing illegal immigration? Bigotry! Suggesting Barack Obama is a less than adept leader? Implied bigotry! Drawing a cartoon with no Muslims in it that asks “Where’s the Muslim?” ?  Psychological bigotry! Writing that having a large Islamic structure looming over the very spot where 3000 citizens died at the hands of terrorists shouting the name of Allah is deliberately insensitive to the legitimate feelings of many New Yorkers and Americans? Written bigotry! Juan Williams admitting that all the attempted terror attacks by Muslims in airplanes makes him viscerally nervous when he sees someone in Islamic garb getting on his flight? Verbal bigotry!

Some have correctly pointed out that college speech codes like George Mason University’s are seldom enforced, in part because they would get on a fast track to the courts if they were. That doesn’t mean that the codes don’t have a chilling effect on discourse, though; they do. They also set perverse and un-American cultural norms, and constitute educational malpractice by teaching students that not merely First Amendment restrictions, but also the repressive Orwellian goal of politically correct thought-control underlying them are legitimate, acceptable, desirable and normal. Such institutions are laying the foundation for an educated citizenry that will be willing to stifle speech and debate by law whenever a consensus determines that such speech is “dangerous” or “offensive”—exactly the kind of speech that launched America over two centuries ago.

Graduates will go on to work for reliable, virtuous-thinking, self-righteous and “un-biased” journalistic organizations, like National Public Radio, that will celebrate the First Amendment while distorting it, firing future Juan Williamses for expressing thoughts they find biased, and intimidating those who would follow his example.

And George Mason will roll, ever faster, in his grave.


5 thoughts on “Why Future Juan Williamses Will Be Fired, As George Mason Rolls Over In His Grave

  1. This is another good piece, Jack. And I’m troubled by the erosions of the concept of free speech. When I was an undergraduate, university policies were adamantly in favor of free speech, and kids who tried to violate such policies–by thuggishly shouting down speakers with whom they they disagreed, for example–were liable for punishmment. The right to free speech, like the right of students to be treated as adults, was considered important. Free speech was a freedom I valued (just as I was glad that the university had gotten rid of parietal hours and mandatory chapel attendance–two older traditions tht you mentioned–not long before I started my student days). The whole idea was that a university was one place where–even more than anywhere else–the free exchange of ideas was an ideal; that ideas should compete freely in the marketplace for followers. And that those who tried to suppress free speech (by, say, shouting down a disliked political figure) were embarassments. But we’ve gone backwards since then. The idea that the university should prevent students from saying or thinking anything “wrong” is an old-fashioned return to the idea that the university should serve as a kind of parent to the students. We wanted to see all vestiges of “in loco parentis” gone. But sometimes things move backwards. And some university officials still want to serve as surrogate parents.

  2. I went to the University of Michigan. I believe my alma mater holds the record for number of speech codes and codes of nonacademic conduct struck down by the US Supreme Court. They went so far as to make the code confidential and instituted student courts that would try students for violations of the secret code (I ask you to find this man guilty of the University’s code of nonacademic conduct. I can’t tell you what he did or what it violated, but I can tell you that we wouldn’t be charging him if he weren’t guilty).

    They did enforce their codes for things like expressing an opinion that affirmative action has a dark side. RA’s were listening on closed dorm room doors with glasses trying to hear if any ‘subversive’ talk was going on. The effect on campus life was stifling. I will never forget the repressive nature of liberalism or the People’s Republic of Ann Arbor.

    • This just amazes me; it is one of those things that I really, naively, didn’t believe could happen in the U.S. It is exactly the kind of excess, oppression and close-mindedness that fuels the most paranoid fears of the right. It also makes me so glad that I had graduated before the speech code scourge began. I would have been expelled, because I cannot tolerate this stuff, and never could.

  3. In a sociology class I took recently my teacher was discussing African American cultural identity versus skin color. She mentioned that President Obama is just as much a “white” man as he is a “black” man, and culturally he was raised as a “white” person . She didn’t get very far into the discussion before it was derailed by a couple of students who where offended by her mentioning that President Obama was raised by his “white” grandparents.
    As a student I never felt that I had to watch what I said, but some students certainly felt that they had the right to not be offended. Ever.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.