... Don't be fooled by such pleas by professors

Houston Chronicle ^ | September 9, 2002 | ONKAR GHATE

[Dog Gone]

The attacks of Sept, 11, according to many college professors, have claimed another victim: free speech on campus. They contend that a chilling climate has arisen, in which they hesitate to voice ideas critical of America for fear of reprimand by university officials.

At the University of Texas, for instance, when the administration criticized journalism professor Robert Jensen for accusing America of terrorism, his colleague described the faculty's reaction: "There was a very clear message that if you stick your neck out, [the administration] will disown you."

Blaming a nationwide climate, the general secretary of the American Association of University Professors said a "distrust of intellectuals has always lurked beneath the surface of American popular opinion. Now it has begun to leak out again."

We must, the professors insist, return to the day when a professor could express any view, no matter how unpopular. But in reality the professors are concerned not with defending free speech -- but with retaining control over the universities.

Freedom of speech is an individual's right to express ideas without coercive interference from the government. Free speech does protect an individual who voices unpopular ideas, but it does not require that others support him. If an individual wants others to finance the expression of his ideas, he must seek their voluntary agreement. To force another person to support ideas he opposes violates his freedom of speech.

A journalist, for instance, has the freedom to write what he pleases but has no right to demand that Time magazine publish it. That decision belongs to the head of Time. Similarly, a professor has the freedom to teach any view he wishes but has no right to demand that Harvard employ him. That decision belongs to the head (or governing body) of Harvard. Freedom of speech is not the right of a Ph.D. to have others provide him with a university classroom.

Yet that is precisely what these professors are demanding. They maintain that no matter how much the trustees of a university disagree with a professor's views, they should not be able to fire him. The owners of a university are to be stripped of their right to choose which ideas their wealth supports. Why? So professors who consistently teach the evil of individualism, capitalism, the profit motive -- and America -- can espouse their views without the burden of having to seek the consent of those forced to sponsor them.

Under the guise of championing free speech, therefore, these leftist professors are actually demanding its destruction.

What makes them think they can get away with this?

Most universities today are public institutions. Critics of the academic left have been calling for the firing of professors who broadcast anti-American ideas, since such views are odious to most taxpayers. But subjecting speech to majority rule, the left correctly argues, obliterates freedom of speech. Thus, it concludes, we must leave college professors alone.

This is a false conclusion. The truth is that public education as such is antithetical to free speech. Whether leftists are forced to pay taxes to fund universities from which their academic spokesmen are barred, or nonleftists are forced to pay taxes to fund professors who condemn America as a terrorist nation, someone loses the right to choose which ideas his money supports.

To protect free speech, therefore, universities would have to be privatized. The owners of a university could then hire the faculty they endorsed, while others could refuse to fund the university if they disagreed with its teachings. But since privatization would threaten the left's grip on the universities, it vehemently opposes this solution. In the name of free speech, the left denounces as "tyranny of the almighty dollar" the sole means of actually preserving free speech.

So we must not be fooled by the professors' cries about threats to their freedom of speech. Freedom is precisely what they don't want. Their grumblings are simply smoke screens to prevent us from seeing that we are right in objecting to being forced to finance their loathsome ideas.

---

Ghate is a resident fellow at the Ayn Rand Institute (www.aynrand.org) in Irvine, Calif. The institute promotes the philosophy of Ayn Rand, author of Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead.

[camle]

not endorseing is not the same thing as censoring.

[Dog Gone]

This column was printed in today's Houston Chronicle following another editorial by renowned University of Texas commie, Robert Jensen, entitled There's still time for Americans to stop insanity .

[A_perfect_lady]

That's right. These professors can say these things if they want, no one's going to put them in jail. But universities can and should be able to fire them.

[logos]

Nice find, Dog. And btw, nice to "see" you.

[Always Right]

They contend that a chilling climate has arisen, in which they hesitate to voice ideas critical of America for fear of reprimand by university officials. .

It is OK that Professors flunk or lowers the grade of students who express conservative ideas, but it is not OK for university officials (who work for the university just like the Professors) to reprimand Professors for anti-American hate speech. What a hypocrit.

[TheCPA]

Tenured professors should not be fired for expressing unpopular views. To do so would violate the very notion of tenure itself, which is to guarantee academic freedom so that new ideas have an avenue of expression. The right of free speech is guaranteed by the first amendment. The right to keep a tenured professor's job at a university is guaranteed by contract. Regardless of how unpopular a professor's views, the professor should not be fired for expressing them.

[Black Agnes]

ping for your list!

[Maceman]

Tenured professors should not be fired for expressing unpopular views. To do so would violate the very notion of tenure itself, which is to guarantee academic freedom so that new ideas have an avenue of expression. The right of free speech is guaranteed by the first amendment. The right to keep a tenured professor's job at a university is guaranteed by contract. Regardless of how unpopular a professor's views, the professor should not be fired for expressing them.

Of course, you have to be a PC leftist before you can get tenure in the first place.

[tcostell]

We must, the professors insist, return to the day when a professor could express any view, no matter how unpopular.

I have to admit, this does address the core issue. Academics are accustomed to living in a world where they can indulge in the coin of their realm "Ideas and information" without any fear of the consequences of error. Unlike those of us in the business arena who suffer losses when incorrect, or (heaven help them) the military who suffer even more from the consequences of their mistakes, academics live in a world where they can do or say anything, and never have to live with it.

This feeling of fear and dread they are talking about, is the intrusion of the real world into their protected environment. And since we have to live with the consequences of the idiocy promoted by Jansen and Chomsky, I see no reason why they shouldn't have to as well.

So I say:

"We must not, under any circumstances, return to the day when a professor could express any view, no matter how unpopular without living with the consequences of that speech."

[TLBSHOW]

So we must not be fooled by the professors' cries about threats to their freedom of speech. Freedom is precisely what they don't want. Their grumblings are simply smoke screens to prevent us from seeing that we are right in objecting to being forced to finance their loathsome ideas.

BUMP TO EXPOSE

[MrB]

living with the consequences of that speech

At the heart of the liberal/leftist is the idea that there should be no individual consequences for individual choices (unless those choices are 'conservative').
Therefor, it is anathema to a leftist to make them live with the consequences of their espoused ideas.

[Cicero]

The opposite is true. In most universities, politically correct leftists can say whatever they like with impunity. But if anybody breaks ranks with these left-wing conformists, they will be ostracized and refused tenure on some bogus ground or other.

The surest way for an untenured academic to lose his job at most universities today is to question the prevailing pieties, which are entirely to the left.

[Brett66]

they hesitate to voice ideas critical of America for fear of reprimand by university officials.

Now how do we get to the point where we hang them for treason? ;)

[MissAmericanPie]

Excellent, your so right about that.

[ethical]

Geeze. When university students speak in opposition to homosexuality, feminist ideology or open boarders they are thrown off campus, gagged or charged with a hate crime and this guys upset because someone did not like his opinion. Grow up.

[STONEWALLS]

"Under the guise of championing free speech, therefore, these leftist professors are
actually demanding its destruction.

What makes them think they can get away with this?"

.....I don't know why the professoriat think they are entitled to tenure in the first place...nobody ever gave me tenure on a job that I worked....My wife is a non-tenured PhD professor and she is not on the tenure track by choice.....you should hear the egos expressed at faculty parties...some of them act like they're entitled to a job for life.....maybe it's because they believe they're smarter than the rest of us, so they deserve it...
Stonewalls

[joesnuffy]

> For the years surrounding the Vietnam war college profs had nothing but contemptuous remarks for Americas conservatives...
> Their whining now is amusing...complaints about their "freedom to lie" (poorly disguised as free speech) denied? Good! It's about time...
> Universities are not the bastions of unfettered debate and havent been for some time...if you arent a liberal you are out...
> I would love to see these "Academia Nuts"™ get their comeuppance

[ffrancone]

You are blending two very different concepts--Freedom of Speech and Contract.

Freedom of speech under the first amendment applies only as against the government. That is "congress" (and now the states under the incorporation doctrine) may not make laws limiting freedom of speech.

Freedom of contract is another issue. If tenured professors really have contracts saying they cannot be fired no matter what, that contract should be honored.

[Redleg Duke]

You want to see the curtailment of the First Ammendment, try saying something pro-American in a liberal arts class at the University of Wisconsin, Madison!