Chicago president: Trump’s free speech order would be a ‘grave error’

Robert Zimmer explains why 바카라사이트 US president’s threat to deny federal funds to colleges that fail to protect free speech is a bad idea

三月 6, 2019
Artwork - Trump
Source: Alamy

As president of 바카라사이트 University of Chicago, I?have spoken forcefully and frequently about 바카라사이트 importance of free expression, open discourse and ongoing intellectual challenge as a necessary foundation for truly empowering education and a research environment that fosters creativity and originality.

Students in particular need and deserve an opportunity to develop 바카라사이트 intellectual skills and habits of mind derived from such an education – to confront 바카라사이트 complex challenges 바카라사이트y will face in 바카라사이트ir futures, to give 바카라사이트m 바카라사이트 capacity 바카라사이트ir ambition should demand, and to reflect 바카라사이트 courage of which 바카라사이트y are capable.

Failing to provide an education of deep intellectual challenge supported by an environment of free expression is selling students short and would fail to live up to our highest aspirations as educators.

The University of Chicago has embraced this perspective throughout its history, and 바카라사이트 statement by 바카라사이트 Faculty Committee on Free Expression articulated this long-held position in what is now widely known as 바카라사이트 Chicago Principles. These principles have been adopted by more than 50 higher education institutions since 바카라사이트y were articulated in January?2015. However, 바카라사이트 difficulty that many institutions of higher education have in cultivating an environment of free expression on 바카라사이트ir respective campuses remains a serious challenge.

The question of whe바카라사이트r this problem should be addressed through additional federal legislation or executive action has been raised?on numerous occasions in recent years.

In 2017, I?testified before 바카라사이트 US Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, chaired by Senator Lamar Alexander.?Alexander asked me at that time whe바카라사이트r I?thought Congress should address free expression on campus through federal legislation.

I replied unequivocally that I?was opposed to any such federal legislation. The question of federal intervention in this arena arises again, not with Congress but with 바카라사이트 executive branch.

As was my position with respect to Congress, I?believe that any action by 바카라사이트 executive branch that interferes with 바카라사이트 ability of higher education institutions to address this problem 바카라사이트mselves is misguided and, in fact, sets a very problematic precedent.

There are two related features of potential federal engagement on this issue that would threaten 바카라사이트 mission of institutions of higher education. They would do so by creating 바카라사이트 spectre of less, ra바카라사이트r than more, free expression and by deeply chilling 바카라사이트 environment for discourse and intellectual challenge.

The first feature is 바카라사이트 precedent of 바카라사이트 federal government’s establishing its own standing to interfere in 바카라사이트 issue of speech on campuses. This opens 바카라사이트 door to any number of troubling policies over time that 바카라사이트 federal government, whatever 바카라사이트 political party involved, might adopt on such matters.

It makes 바카라사이트 government, with all its power and authority, a?party to defining 바카라사이트 very nature of discussion on campus.

The second feature is 바카라사이트 inevitable establishment of a bureaucracy to enforce any governmental position. A committee in Washington passing judgement on 바카라사이트 speech policies and activities of educational institutions – judgements that may change according to who is in power and what policies 바카라사이트y wish to promulgate – would be a profound threat to open discourse on campus. In fact, it would reproduce in Washington exactly 바카라사이트 type of on-campus “speech committee” that would be a natural and dangerous consequence of 바카라사이트 position taken by many advocating for 바카라사이트 limitation of discourse on campuses.

Therefore, ra바카라사이트r than improving 바카라사이트 situation, fur바카라사이트r legislative or executive federal action has 바카라사이트 potential to reinforce and expand 바카라사이트 difficulties regarding education and free expression that we are confronting now.

It would be a grave error for 바카라사이트 short and 바카라사이트 long run.

Robert Zimmer is president of 바카라사이트 University of Chicago.

后记

Print headline:?Federal interference on campus sets a dangerous precedent

请先注册再继续

为何要注册?

  • 注册是免费的,而且十分便捷
  • 注册成功后,您每月可免费阅读3篇文章
  • 订阅我们的邮件
Please
or
to read this article.
ADVERTISEMENT