HOW COLLEGES PURGE CONSERVATIVES
PART 2

 

 

 

Rudy Takala
January 19, 2008
NewsWithViews.com

In my last column, I commented on the repression exercised by college professors upon their impressionable students. Their goal is to mold those students who come in without many beliefs until they reflect, in perfect uniformity, a secular worldview. Students whose beliefs already match professors’ ideal ideological paradigm are rewarded. Those who refuse to conform are at the very least persecuted, and they are often denied graduation.

Richard Rorty, whom I’ve mentioned previously, justified the state of academia in a statement directed towards parents. He explained that it was the role of academia “to discredit you in the eyes of your children… to strip away your fundamentalist religious community of dignity… to make your views seem silly rather than discussible.”

That is the reason for which most college faculty and administrations are not willing to facilitate debate, opting instead to prohibit conservative speech by calling it offensive. They don’t want to disprove conservative viewpoints; they want to make them seem outrageous.

Mike Adams, a professor at UNC-Wilmington, reminisced upon being overheard by a Dean as he “was complaining about a university speech code banning all ‘offensive’ speech. The Dean said the code was ‘not that bad’ because it only sought to ban certain types of offensive speech.” Of course; it was only meant to ban speech that was offensive, say, to homosexuals – not to Christians. “I thought that made it worse,” wrote Adams.

Sometimes, simply silencing Christian students is enough. But a preponderance of the time it is not. Some students are given an option to either adhere to the philosophy of secularism or face academic probation, demerits on their record, or expulsion.

Emily Brooker, who sought a degree in social work from Missouri State, was required as part of a class project to sign a letter to the state’s legislature supporting gay adoption.

When she refused on the basis of religious conviction, the university’s ethics committee interviewed her. They asked questions such as "Do you think gays and lesbians are sinners?" and "Do you think I am a sinner?" She was then made to write a paper and sign a contract stating that she would conform her religious beliefs to the ethical and social ideology of the university and to the social work profession.

Fortunately, a lawsuit she filed after graduating succeeded in forcing the university to reimburse her and to open an investigation.

Occasionally, students aren’t willing to play along to get along. One person who comes to mind is Troy Scheffler, a former graduate student at my own Hamline University. When he e-mailed President Linda Hanson with the suggestion that campus policy conform to state laws allowing for concealed handguns, he was expelled and an armed guard was posted outside his classroom’s door.

As a 31 -year-old graduate student unlikely to change his worldview, the university probably concluded that it was unable to influence him. Worse yet, he disrupted its ideological conformity. So they called him dangerous and kicked him out.

Mark Moyar is a history instructor who wrote about the challenges that face conservatives trying to become professors. When he applied for a position at the University of Iowa, he noted that their hiring manual mandated the hiring committee to “assess ways the applicants will bring rich experiences, diverse backgrounds, and ideology to the university community.”

He then referenced an Associated Press article in which Iowa students complained about having to “cloak their political leanings to appeal to professors... Conservatives say the abundance of Democratic professors affects course offerings, reading selections and class discussions, shaping impressionable minds.”

It would seem to follow that Dr. Moyar might contribute to the university’s diversity. But as he came to find, his level of “diversity” wasn’t assessed. When he filed a complaint with the local diversity office, he was told that the university “does not expect hiring departments to make this type of assessment of every candidate.”

The hiring search committee also complained that the book he wrote on Vietnam (which offered a conservative interpretation of events) didn’t include citations to any Vietnamese sources when, said Moyar, it actually contained more than two hundred. They made up baseless excuses not to hire him.

In the end, the department hired someone who had been out of graduate school for eight years without publishing a book. That candidate may not have been the paragon of excellence, but at least he wasn’t a conservative.

Examples abound; space does not. Suffice it to say that if you have ever wondered why there were no conservatives in higher education, you've been informed. They aren’t allowed to progress that far. For part one click below.

Click here for part -----> 1,

© 2008 Rudy Takala - All Rights Reserved