Wednesday, May 28, 2014

Bastions of Intolerance


When did colleges become bastions of intolerance? I sit back and marvel at all of the speakers during this year’s commencement season who have been protested, removed, or forced to cancel their speeches. The list is jaw dropping for the amount of wisdom and knowledge these people could share: Condoleeza Rice, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Christine Lagarde, Robert Birgeneau, and others. What happened to universities being the places where ideas were exchanged, discussed, and debated? What happened to universities being the place where “radicalism” was accepted practice and “sticking it to the man” was better than anything that could go on one’s resume?

Now, colleges have become “the man” and their Far-Left dominated faculties and student bodies will not tolerate anyone that threatens that orthodoxy. Their argument is that they are merely participating in the debate by speaking up against those who they disagree with. This argument, however, is like a child saying that he or she has no homework when they left all of their books in their locker at school. The intent of debate is to let both parties speak, and then reason and persuade the other person to your side through logic and facts. Debate is not about shouting down your opponent before they have a chance to speak. It is also not about getting the judge to disqualify your opponent before the debate begins. This is akin to students going to a university president to cancel an invitation.

When I was a senior at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, my roommate and I would argue and debate incessantly about politics, international relations, and many other topics. Some of the debates got very heated and very passionate. For many of these arguments, we came at the issue from sides that were nearly at the extreme opposites of the spectrum. Never once, though, did either of us try to prevent the other from speaking. In some cases he persuaded me and in some cases I persuaded him. Many times, the debate was left unsettled because neither of us would budge or could be swayed to change our opinion. Why does this story matter?

This story matters because what was important was the debate itself. Neither one of us would have learned anything if we hadn’t had the debate in the first place. For me, one of the best things about the debates was that I could learn the facts and ideas those on the opposite side would use so that I could develop specific counters to them for future arguments.

Institutions like universities pride themselves on being places where ideas flow freely and rigorous debate is part of daily life in the pursuit of academic excellence. If this truly is the case, then every university president should take any written request to ban someone from speaking and burn it in front of the student body with the simple words that intolerance of debate has no place in this institution.

No comments: