Universities, if they are private entities, may operate in any way they see fit.
However, like most of us, they will eventually be accountable for their actions. If they feel that they must, for instance, orient themselves entirely around a particular political philosophy, such as socialism or political correctness, then they will be known primarily, instead of "institutions of higher learning," as propagators of those philosophies
Stuart Taylor IS a card carrying Democrat. This article from him is like a breath of fresh air. Yep, the campus censors work not to promote a free exchange of ideas but to intimidate and bully conservatives into silence. Which is why at Cal State Poly, the campus administration sought to make an example of Steve Hinkle. You know we can't have the expression of politically incorrect ideas, like blacks leaving the liberal plantation, on campus. It might give people forbidden thoughts.
PC means "precludes cognition".
This ping is a little late. Apologies...
*****
Leftism on Campus ping!
If you would like to be added to the Leftism on Campus ping list, please
notify me via FReep-mail.
Regards...
To all:
Here is a letter received through e-mail today from CalPoly:
Thank you for taking the time to contact Cal Poly regarding what you
apparently have read or heard about an alleged First Amendment issue at
the University. The University is concerned that many people are being
purposefully misled about free speech at Cal Poly. Recent Internet,
print and TV talk show publicity surrounding promotion of a speech by a
campus speaker has contained many inaccuracies, misinformation, and even
falsehoods.
Let me assure you that Cal Poly highly values the First Amendment and
free speech. They are at the core of our identity as an American
institution of higher education. The University strives to create and
maintain a campus environment that supports free speech and open inquiry
for all. This campus does not practice censorship of thought or word, or
impose bans on speech or expression. Indeed, Cal Poly places among its
top priority establishing conditions that foster open inquiry and
healthy debate for all.
We want you to know that the speaker did indeed speak at Cal Poly, and
fliers advertising the speech were posted on bulletin boards and kiosks
throughout campus. The speech took place on campus and was attended by
some 250 students, and written up afterwards in the Mustang Daily, the
campus student newspaper. You can read the article on the Mustang
Daily's web site at:
http://www.mustangdaily.calpoly.edu/archive/20021115/index.php?story=n4. Federal privacy laws (Family and Educational Rights Privacy Act,
[FERPA],
http://www.ed.gov/offices/OII/fpco/ferpa/index.html) prevent
the University from discussing student discipline cases. Although
students may consent to waive their privacy rights and allow
universities to discuss their discipline cases, the student involved in
this case has not signed a general waiver despite our request that he do
so. He has, instead, provided us with a limited waiver which allows us
to discuss his case only with staff members of FIRE (Foundation for
Individual Rights in Education), and no one else. Unless the student
signs a general waiver, the University would be unable to discuss the
discipline case more broadly and the facts associated with the case.
Without discussing the specifics of the student's case, I can tell you
that this is a case involving student conduct, not speech content. Any
characterization to the contrary is false. Cal Poly supports and
upholds freedom of speech as a Constitutional right, and the University
has policies in place to protect the rights of all parties on campus to
pursue learning and otherwise go about their business. These include
policies regarding the disruption of classes, meetings and other
University business. California State University regulations regarding
"time, place and manner" of expression implemented by Cal Poly exist to
protect open expression, not stifle it, to balance the nature of a
university as a free and ordered space.
I hope you would agree that, in general, while all of us enjoy the right
to freedom of speech, it does not include permission to disrupt
scheduled meetings or classes while doing so - in other words, to
infringe on the rights of others.
In addition to misinformation about posting of the flier by the student
involved in this case, we want to stress to you that several statements
attributed to Cal Poly officials in recent print, Internet and broadcast
publicity have been complete fabrications.
I can say with certainty that statements and quotes attributed to me are
in some cases completely false, and in others, taken so far out of
context so as to distort the meaning.
Statements attributed to Cal Poly Vice Provost for Academic Programs
David Conn are also not true. Some recent coverage has alleged Dr. Conn
has threatened to expel or suspend the student involved. This is
completely false. At no time has the student been threatened with
expulsion or suspension for this incident.
Cal Poly offers and supports many venues for freedom of expression,
including invited speakers, rallies, impromptu speeches in public areas,
and public bulletin boards throughout campus. We will continue to
encourage our students to listen to speakers with differing points of
view.
This University is a place enriched by individual differences and also
where shared purpose, commitment, relationships, and responsibility are
combined to promote a healthy and respectful community.
As for the resolution of the student judicial case, Cal Poly considers
the matter closed and will not pursue it further.
Thank you for your sharing your thoughts on this important issue. For
more information, please visit:
http://www.calpolynews.calpoly.edu/free-speech.html. Sincerely,
Cornel N. Morton
Vice President for Student Affairs
