Williams: Fruits of college indoctrination

By Walter E. Williams |

Much of today’s incivility and contempt for personal liberty has its roots on college campuses, and most of the uncivil and contemptuous are people with college backgrounds. Let’s look at a few highly publicized recent examples of incivility and attacks on free speech.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and his wife, Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao, were accosted and harassed by a deranged left-wing mob as they were leaving a dinner at Georgetown University. Sen. McConnell was harassed by protesters at Reagan National Airport, as well as at several venues in Kentucky. Sen. Ted Cruz and his wife were harassed at a Washington, D.C., restaurant.

Afterward, a group called Smash Racism DC wrote: “No — you can’t eat in peace — your politics are an attack on all of us. You’re (sic) votes are a death wish. Your votes are hate crimes.” Other members of Congress – such as Andy Harris, Susan Collins and Rand Paul – have been physically attacked or harassed by leftists. Most recent is the case of Fox News political commentator Tucker Carlson. A leftist group showed up at his house at night, damaging his front door and chanting, “Tucker Carlson, we will fight! We know where you sleep at night!” “Racist scumbag, leave town!”

Mayhem against people with different points of view is excused as just deserts for what is seen as hate speech. Enterprise Institute scholar Charles Murray discovered this when he was shouted down at Middlebury College and the professor escorting him was sent to the hospital with injuries. Students at the University of California, Berkeley shut down a controversial speaker and caused riot damage estimated at $100,000. Protesters at both UCLA and Claremont McKenna College disrupted scheduled lectures by Manhattan Institute scholar Heather Mac Donald.

The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education has discovered so-called bias response teams on hundreds of American college campuses. Bias response teams report to campus officials – and sometimes to law enforcement officers – speech that may cause “alarm, anger, or fear” or that might otherwise offend. Drawing pictures or cartoons that belittle people because of their beliefs or political affiliation can be reported as hate speech. Universities expressly set their sights on prohibiting constitutionally protected speech. As FIRE reported in 2017, hundreds of universities nationwide now maintain Orwellian systems that ask students to report – often anonymously – their neighbors, friends and professors for any instances of supposed biased speech and expression.

A recent Brookings Institution poll found that nearly half of college students believe that hate speech is not protected by the First Amendment. That’s nonsense; it is. Fifty-one percent of college students think they have a right to shout down a speaker with whom they disagree. Nineteen percent of students think that it’s acceptable to use violence to prevent a speaker from speaking. Over 50 percent agree that colleges should prohibit speech and viewpoints that might offend certain people. One shouldn’t be surprised at all if these visions are taught and held by many of their professors. Colleges once taught and promoted an understanding of Western culture. Today many professors and the college bureaucracy teach students that they’re victims of Western culture and values.

Benjamin Franklin wrote, “Whoever would overthrow the Liberty of a Nation, must begin by subduing the Freeness of Speech.” Much later, Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart said, “Censorship reflects a society’s lack of confidence in itself. It is a hallmark of an authoritarian regime.”

From the Nazis to Stalinists to Maoists, tyrants have always started out supporting free speech, just as American leftists did during the 1960s. Their support for free speech is easy to understand. Speech is vital for the realization of their goals of command, control and confiscation. The right to say what they please is their tool for indoctrination, propagandizing and proselytization. Once the leftists gain control, as they have at many universities, free speech becomes a liability and must be suppressed. This is increasingly the case on university campuses. Much of the off-campus incivility we see today is the fruit of what a college education has done to our youth.

2 Responses to Williams: Fruits of college indoctrination

  1. Doug Ferguson November 21, 2018 at 11:52 am

    This is a prime example of the “means” justifying the “end”. I recently published an Op Ed in the Mat-Su Valley’s “People’s Paper” on this subject. I reproduce it below:

    Does The End Justify the Means? November 2018
    by Doug Ferguson

    There is a fundamental philosophy underlying much of what goes on in the world today. It doesn’t matter if it deals with climate change, national or international political power, inner city violence, poverty, the environment or any other issue endlessly dramatized by our mainstream media, politicians and many of the so called “experts” in our midst. It accounts for the humorlessness, confusion, rancor, hatred, and in many cases, the episodes of outright anarchy we see in our country and the world.

    It is a wholesale endorsement of this idea: If you believe your cause is good, noble or profitable or you just want raw power, then the end justifies the means. If the means is exaggerating, falsifying or even damaging the opposition’s reputation by doing these things for your cause, then it is justified. Limiting your opponent’s freedom to speak in whatever means possible is justified. Even physical violence can be justified for your cause.

    This philosophy was codified by Saul Alinsky in his “Rules for Radicals” published in 1971 summarizing methods he had used over his long career in Chicago as the original “community organizer” where he founded the Industrial Areas Foundation to train future followers of his methods. In his book he devoted a whole chapter to justify his tactics as “—anything is fair in war”. Using his complicated explanation of “just causes” and “greater good”, today’s proponents view most of their issues as “justifiable wars”.

    The fundamental concept is by no means a new one. Ideas of Machiavelli and many other schemers in history come to mind. However, Alinsky’s methods took old ideas and adapted them to modern conditions in the USA and have been endorsed by many powerful people. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton as young politicians both endorsed his methods if not his goals. Obama’s original move from New York to Chicago as a young man was to join Alinski’s foundation and become a “community organizer”.

    The problem is once you adopt this philosophy, you eventually change the noble “ends” you wanted to achieve. This happens through the principle of unintended consequences and ignoring real and potentially solvable social, economic and environmental problems through civil means. You also create new problems that were not anticipated. Wars, no matter how justified they may be, always have had negative and unseen destructive consequences. Wars also create problems even after they have been won. History abounds with examples.

    That is why stable societies have elections, civil laws and representative governments to resolve issues and problems. Either that or they must resort to some form of enforceable dictatorship. A safe society that provides for its member’s basic stability needs cannot have anarchy. Wars create anarchy during their duration and, in most cases, long after they are over.

    As more and more organizations and movements endorse these “Rules for Radicals” methods we will see more and more anarchy in our country and throughout the world. Unless the trend to devalue civility, honesty and truth is reversed in our country, it inevitably will lead to more violence and either to a police state or civil war.

    We can hope and pray for the best, but first we must see the problem for what it is.

    Reply
  2. Elizabeth November 21, 2018 at 5:58 pm

    Agree wi h both Mr. Williams and Mr. Furguson. Would add also that when there are no moral absolutes, no absolute of right and wrong, then the means can be whatever is necessary, no matter how illegal, uncivil, damaging, dishonest, etc.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

For information, sizing, and rates of banner advertising space we have available, please e-mail Mark Hopkin at markh@porcaro.me, or call him at (907) 276-4262.