"In the meantime, that leaves the California Community College DEI policy as the most clearly unconstitutional law on the books in the country — but that gets very, very little media coverage even though it does something that’s arguably worse: compelling professors to promote ideas they may not agree with."
But why? Why does this problem with the California Community College (CCC) system receive so little attention? I saw Bill Maher interview CA governor Newsom last week, and I was hoping that Maher would ask about this genuinely troubling issue in Newsom's state. Instead, Maher conducted a disappointingly softball interview. He even allowed Newsom to dismiss DEI criticism as a right-wing phenomenon without pushing back on that mischaracterization at all.
And I can think of only three relatively high-profile centrist/Liberal types who have written on the DEI censorship at CCC: Conor Friedersdorf at The Atlantic; David French at the NYT; and Mr. Lukianoff on Substack, at FIRE, or in his books. Where is everybody else?
Absolutely agree! The level of self censorship and the pressure to conform have accelerated so rapidly it's dizzying. Reading your book now! So helpful in understanding and navigating this new landscape. Thank you for fighting this good fight.
I'm glad you wrote this up. It's refreshing to see a good faith critique when so many of your critics are on intent on painting FIREOrg as some right wing shill outfit.
The California Community College DEI policy is exactly what Robert Jackson’s Supreme Court ruled illegal in 1943 in West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette. The decision is worth reading today and is filled with Jackson’s signature rhetorical gems. The most famous is likely “compulsory unification of opinion achieves only the unanimity of the graveyard.”
The differentiation by discipline suggests that the faculty is the problem, not the DEI administrators. Faculty runs the search committees and leftist faculty=leftist results in hiring.
Glad I'm 70. Don't need to deal with this shit. They can cancel me all they want. I call them as I see them. I call a spade a spade. I don't soft soap a anything. And, I don't give a rat's behind about pronouns, or being called a "phobe" or having white privilege. Don't like what I say? Just "walk on by".
"It’s also important to note that the problem will only get worse as older faculty, who are generally far better on free speech, begin to retire in large numbers. "
Begin? The current tilt in academia was much smaller in the 90's. You're already looking at the result of a 25 year long purge by attrition. Today you're just looking at a mopping up operation.
I believe what happened was that the '94 election caused left wing academics, even then a significant majority outside STEM, to switch from viewing their conservative colleagues as harmless eccentrics, to a serious threat. They could actually end up in power!
And so they stopped tolerating them, and set out to remove the threat.
I think your cautions about being too optimistic about the state of free speech are warranted, but then again, I really think we've turned a corner post-10/7. I had long thought that there would inevitably cause a breach between the Democratic Party/liberal establishment and the kind of extreme identitarians they've been cultivating in the DEI push. The atrocities of Hamas and the fact that many high-profile wokesters and DEI types seemed to apologize for or even endorse these actions finally said the quiet part out loud about how they think the 'privileged' deserve to be treated and it's pretty ugly. Not to mention, going up against a third rail of American politics - support for Israel - that institutions like the Democratic Party and the business community have not broken with, for all of their seeming embrace of far-left causes. The power of the DEI establishment was already waning and I think 10/7 was kind of the nail in the coffin, at least at this particular cultural moment.
A recent case to pay attention to is the resignation of six TED fellows over TED's 'platforming' of Bill Ackman and Bari Weiss:
If you read their letter, it's much like a classic college disinvitation demand, and the petulant tone of the letter jumps out immediately. Albeit, these people are ostensible adults who have actually achieved high status careers, and yet still behave like bratty 20 year-olds.
It's been four days since the letter, and so far no response from TED. I have a feeling that they're not going to cave to this, and that the disinviters have badly misread the proverbial room. This is the kind of thing that probably would have actually suceeded back in 2020, but I think the culture is in a very different place right now.
That said, you're right to point out that folks like college administrators will have learned nothing from this, and that higher education and other places where there's been wholesale institutional capture will keep pushing for censorship and compelled speech and that where possible (eg, governmental organizations), legal pressure and bad publicity needst to be kept up, and an ongoing push for a culture of free speech needs to continue. This round of the 'political correctness wars' was far worse than the 90s version, and I'd hate to see what's coming around the bend 20 more years if this censorious mindset on both the right and the left isn't reversed.
Honestly, not a fan of Adam Corolla - I thought The Man Show was pretty dopey, and now he comes across as simply reactionary, even on points where I agree with him. But if this grows the "free speech army", then, sure, I guess it takes all kinds.
"In the meantime, that leaves the California Community College DEI policy as the most clearly unconstitutional law on the books in the country — but that gets very, very little media coverage even though it does something that’s arguably worse: compelling professors to promote ideas they may not agree with."
But why? Why does this problem with the California Community College (CCC) system receive so little attention? I saw Bill Maher interview CA governor Newsom last week, and I was hoping that Maher would ask about this genuinely troubling issue in Newsom's state. Instead, Maher conducted a disappointingly softball interview. He even allowed Newsom to dismiss DEI criticism as a right-wing phenomenon without pushing back on that mischaracterization at all.
And I can think of only three relatively high-profile centrist/Liberal types who have written on the DEI censorship at CCC: Conor Friedersdorf at The Atlantic; David French at the NYT; and Mr. Lukianoff on Substack, at FIRE, or in his books. Where is everybody else?
Brilliant response. I am glad that Substack gives writers a means to respond to book reviews.
The Franks article is repulsive--it reads like something written by 1950s pro-Soviet communists.
Absolutely agree! The level of self censorship and the pressure to conform have accelerated so rapidly it's dizzying. Reading your book now! So helpful in understanding and navigating this new landscape. Thank you for fighting this good fight.
I'm glad you wrote this up. It's refreshing to see a good faith critique when so many of your critics are on intent on painting FIREOrg as some right wing shill outfit.
The California Community College DEI policy is exactly what Robert Jackson’s Supreme Court ruled illegal in 1943 in West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette. The decision is worth reading today and is filled with Jackson’s signature rhetorical gems. The most famous is likely “compulsory unification of opinion achieves only the unanimity of the graveyard.”
That chart showing numbers for different departments needs some label explaining what those numbers are. Engineering is 1.6 what? 1.6 % Republicans?
The differentiation by discipline suggests that the faculty is the problem, not the DEI administrators. Faculty runs the search committees and leftist faculty=leftist results in hiring.
Glad I'm 70. Don't need to deal with this shit. They can cancel me all they want. I call them as I see them. I call a spade a spade. I don't soft soap a anything. And, I don't give a rat's behind about pronouns, or being called a "phobe" or having white privilege. Don't like what I say? Just "walk on by".
"It’s also important to note that the problem will only get worse as older faculty, who are generally far better on free speech, begin to retire in large numbers. "
Begin? The current tilt in academia was much smaller in the 90's. You're already looking at the result of a 25 year long purge by attrition. Today you're just looking at a mopping up operation.
I believe what happened was that the '94 election caused left wing academics, even then a significant majority outside STEM, to switch from viewing their conservative colleagues as harmless eccentrics, to a serious threat. They could actually end up in power!
And so they stopped tolerating them, and set out to remove the threat.
"ACLU National Legal Director" That's all you had to say.
What does the x-axis on your second chart (that runs from Engineering to Communications) represent? It's not labeled
The numbers on that first graph lack units. For example, Engineering is 1.6 what?
Colleges getting tax exemptions should be required to hire at least 30% Republicans, & 30% Democrats, as professors and administrators.
It’s illegal, but hard to prove, to discriminate against hiring Republicans. Losing a benefit can be an explicit political decision.
I think your cautions about being too optimistic about the state of free speech are warranted, but then again, I really think we've turned a corner post-10/7. I had long thought that there would inevitably cause a breach between the Democratic Party/liberal establishment and the kind of extreme identitarians they've been cultivating in the DEI push. The atrocities of Hamas and the fact that many high-profile wokesters and DEI types seemed to apologize for or even endorse these actions finally said the quiet part out loud about how they think the 'privileged' deserve to be treated and it's pretty ugly. Not to mention, going up against a third rail of American politics - support for Israel - that institutions like the Democratic Party and the business community have not broken with, for all of their seeming embrace of far-left causes. The power of the DEI establishment was already waning and I think 10/7 was kind of the nail in the coffin, at least at this particular cultural moment.
A recent case to pay attention to is the resignation of six TED fellows over TED's 'platforming' of Bill Ackman and Bari Weiss:
theguardian.com/technology/2024/jan/24/ted-fellows-resign-bill-ackman-speaker-conference
docs.google.com/document/d/1a8CtDgBgpbmWW6BgvOtFHkWhHg8Q_SmnV2liuwiGZ_o/edit
If you read their letter, it's much like a classic college disinvitation demand, and the petulant tone of the letter jumps out immediately. Albeit, these people are ostensible adults who have actually achieved high status careers, and yet still behave like bratty 20 year-olds.
It's been four days since the letter, and so far no response from TED. I have a feeling that they're not going to cave to this, and that the disinviters have badly misread the proverbial room. This is the kind of thing that probably would have actually suceeded back in 2020, but I think the culture is in a very different place right now.
That said, you're right to point out that folks like college administrators will have learned nothing from this, and that higher education and other places where there's been wholesale institutional capture will keep pushing for censorship and compelled speech and that where possible (eg, governmental organizations), legal pressure and bad publicity needst to be kept up, and an ongoing push for a culture of free speech needs to continue. This round of the 'political correctness wars' was far worse than the 90s version, and I'd hate to see what's coming around the bend 20 more years if this censorious mindset on both the right and the left isn't reversed.
Honestly, not a fan of Adam Corolla - I thought The Man Show was pretty dopey, and now he comes across as simply reactionary, even on points where I agree with him. But if this grows the "free speech army", then, sure, I guess it takes all kinds.