|
School is in. Time to steel yourself for eight
more months of horror stories about campus
political correctness. But before the madness
begins, let me give you some good news —
even great news. When it comes to America's
politically correct campuses, all is not lost. In
fact, in some important respects we are
actually beginning to win the battle for freedom
of thought at America's colleges and
universities. That is largely because of a feisty
little three-year-old named FIRE, the
Foundation for Individual Rights in
Education. Everyone who cares about
intellectual freedom in the American academy
needs to know that there is real reason for
hope. Or perhaps we should say that the
enemies of freedom in today's academy have
finally learned that they are playing with FIRE.
Three years ago this October, the Foundation
for Individual Rights in Education was founded
by right civil libertarian Alan Charles Kors and
left civil libertarian Harvey Silverglate, best
friends since college. That tells you
something important. FIRE is about the
respect for freedom of speech and
conscience that used to unite all Americans,
whatever their political persuasion. And truth
to tell, despite the takeover of our college
campuses by radicals who claim that classic
liberalism is simply a cover for the power of
oppressive elites, the great majority of the
American people still believe in our traditional
liberties.
That is the secret of FIRE's success. If FIRE
had a motto, it would be Supreme Court Louis
Brandeis's famous phrase: "Sunlight is the
best disinfectant." Simply by publicizing (or by
threatening to publicize) the worst campus
abuses of individual freedom, FIRE has
repeatedly succeeded in forcing radical
professors and benighted college
administrators to back down. In effect, FIRE
works by deploying the good sense of the
American people against the tyrannical
machinations of our campus radicals.
As someone who follows these issues with
care, I can tell you that I have rarely seen
anything as exciting as an article about FIRE
in a publication entitled Dean & Provost.
Dean & Provost is a specialized newsletter
directed to high-level college administrators.
The article in question featured an interview
with FIRE founder, Alan Charles Kors, and told
administrators in no uncertain terms that,
while they might find Kors's views shocking or
offensive, they had best be forewarned. In any
controversy over speech codes, political
indoctrination at freshman orientation, or the
fairness of disciplinary proceedings against
the politically incorrect, administrators would
likely be facing either Kors himself, or one of
his colleagues from FIRE. And in case after
case, where they have indeed been
confronted by Kors and his compatriots,
college administrators have been forced to
surrender.
So what did Alan Charles Kors say to Dean
& Provost that was so shocking and
offensive? You really have to read the whole
interview, but here are some
choice excerpts:
Q: Aren't chief academic
officers damned if they do and damned if they
don't as far as political correctness? How can
they in all good conscience not protect
minorities, women and gays and lesbians on
campus?
Kors: What an absurd question. Chief
academic officers should work to protect
everyone on campus from crime, violence,
and violations of their rights. What you term
"minorities" (we are each a minority of one),
and women, and gays and lesbians should
have equal protection from crime, violence
and violation of their rights. Rights belong to
individuals; rights are not a zero sum game.
Q: How do minority professors and
students feel about FIRE protesting against
political correctness? Don't they expect to have
a safe campus environment?
Kors: I don't distinguish students and
professors by blood as you have just done,
and I don't assume that there is a "minority"
perspective that follows from blood. No one
who tells people that they are too weak to live
with freedom, legal equality, the Bill of Rights
or academic freedom is their friend. Everyone
expects a safe environment on campus.
Anyone who initiates violence should be
punished.
Anyone who has the presence of mind, the
depth of understanding — and the sheer guts
— to turn back such PC questions so
brilliantly has my deepest regard. It saddens
me (though it hardly surprises me) that we've
reached a state where a publication like
Dean and Provost can find Kors's apt
and admirable remarks offensive. But it
delights me to imagine Kors and his friends
sitting across the table from actual deans and
provosts throughout the land — reading them
the riot act in exactly this way.
That, in fact, is precisely what happens when
FIRE goes to work. Seventy-five percent of
FIRE's cases are successfully resolved
without any publicity, chiefly because Kors and
company privately let the administrators in
question know what true liberty means — and
promise that the world will hear about it if
classic liberal principle is trampled. Again and
again, politically correct administrators cave.
In its first big
case, FIRE went to the defense of a
Christian student group at Tufts University
which had refused to promote a member with
an unorthodox view of scripture and sexuality.
That member was a lesbian. When the
Christian group was put on probation by Tufts,
FIRE intervened, pointing out that a gay
student group would not be put on probation
for refusing to promote an Evangelical
Christian with a traditional view of sexuality.
Once a hair's-breadth from the grave, Tufts'
Christian student group is now thriving.
FIRE has also made tremendous headway in
its battle against the kangaroo-court
disciplinary hearings commonly deployed
against students and professors brought up
on charges of sexual harassment or offensive
speech. Largely because of public opposition
orchestrated by FIRE's canny and articulate
executive director, Thor Halvorssen, Columbia
University's draconian "sexual misconduct
policy" (i.e. sexual-harassment code) is
on its last legs, while Harvard's code has
already been reformed. Columbia's code
denied all procedural rights to the accused,
such as the right to an attorney, the right to
cross-examine witnesses and the accuser,
the right to an appeal, the right to an impartial
jury, etc. With changes at universities like
Harvard and Columbia, Halvorssen and FIRE
may yet succeed in provoking a nationwide
reform of campus sexual harassment codes
and rules for disciplinary hearings.
Another FIRE case shows why reform of these
kangaroo-court college disciplinary
proceedings is so desperately needed. In the
wake of 9/11, FIRE went to the aid of Ken
Hearlson, a tenured political-science
instructor who was suspended and barred
from the campus where he had taught for 18
years — without a proper hearing — after
being accused by Muslim students of insulting
them in class. After interviewing 25 witnesses
and listening to audio tapes of the class, the
accusations were found to be without merit.
Yet even then — with taped proof of his
innocence — it took publicity from FIRE to get
justice for Hearlson. How many others are
subject to punishment in kangaroo
proceedings based on false accusations?
What about those who are not fortunate
enough to have audio tapes and an
organization like FIRE on their side?
It isn't only conservatives who are defended by
FIRE. Halvorssen makes it clear that FIRE
would quickly come to the aid of a
homosexual student group or a group of
students who lionized Malcolm X, if they were
denied money because of their views. You
might say that finding a case like that is about
as likely as finding the Easter Bunny. But last
year, Linda McCarriston, a Marxist-feminist
professor at the University of Alaska,
Anchorage, did indeed come under assault by
radical students and craven administrators,
for daring to criticize multiculturalism in her
class and for writing a poem about sexual
abuse in native Alaskan culture. I wrote about
this case in "P.C. Hits
Anchorage," noting at the time the critical
role played by FIRE in turning the tide in favor
of McCarriston's academic freedom.
With these and many other victories under its
belt, FIRE is on a roll, and well placed to make
national reform of campus speech codes,
college-sponsored political indoctrination, and
kangaroo disciplinary proceedings a reality.
Naturally, given the near-total domination of
America's campuses by radicals with no love
of liberty, too much optimism on this count
would be foolish. But it is not at all unrealistic
to say that, on many fronts, FIRE has given the
opponents of campus PC a fighting chance —
and more. This is a new and tremendously
important development, and it deserves
recognition.
Last academic year, with an enormous
number of well-publicized and successful
cases, FIRE truly came into its own. But the
battle has only begun. There are two things
that readers can do — they can let FIRE help
them, and they can help FIRE. As we head into
the new school year, students and professors
need to know that if their rights are violated,
they can turn to FIRE. In fact, FIRE will soon
make available a series of pamphlets that
detail the rights to speech, freedom of
conscience, and fair procedure to which all of
America's students and professors are
entitled. Armed with knowledge of their rights
— and with the knowledge that they can call
on the aid of FIRE should those rights be
trampled — it will become increasingly difficult
for politically correct professors and
administrators to tyrannize their campuses.
For those with the inclination and the means
to be of help in this battle, contributions to
FIRE can make all the difference in the world.
FIRE is not a wealthy organization, far from it.
For three years, FIRE has worked miracles on
a shoestring budget (both Kors and
Silverglate serve without pay). But FIRE's
success means that more and more students
and professors who run afoul of political
correctness are calling on FIRE's services.
Without increased funding, FIRE will lose a
rare opportunity to generate truly national
victories against campus political correctness
on several critical fronts. If you care at all about
these issues — and want your contribution to
actually do something — I know of
nothing more effective than to feed the FIRE.
Should you want to contribute, you can do so
by clicking here.
This article originally ran in National Review Online and is adapted by
permission of National Review.
Copyright © 2002 National Review. All
rights reserved. International copyright
secured.
|