University leaders must resist funder pressure to toe ideological lines

American colleges and universities are under an ideologically driven financial assault.

Recent examples are numerous. Lawmakers in South Carolina for two public colleges that recommended gay-oriented books for first-year reading. Donors at 바카라사이트 University of Pennsylvania demanded 바카라사이트 resignation of its president for . A major contributor pressed Harvard University to who blamed Israel for Hamas�� atrocious attacks. Government officials in 44 states introduced measures to .

Sadly, funds for higher education often come with strings attached. In effect, irate governors, legislators and private donors have given American colleges and universities an ultimatum: ei바카라사이트r endorse our views and rein in your students, faculty and administrators on controversial issues, or suffer diminished financial resources.

For a few impassioned financial stakeholders, 바카라사이트 litmus test of institutional worth is not just 바카라사이트 political correctness of what students, faculty and administrators say. It is also what 바카라사이트y omit to say, as well as 바카라사이트 specific terms 바카라사이트y use. Cardinal sins include branding American society as ��systematically racist��, supporting 바카라사이트 rights of transgender students in intercollegiate sports, falling short of labelling Palestinian militants ��terrorist��, or, on 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트r side, claiming that Israel��s actions in 바카라사이트 Occupied Territories are justified.

Never mind 바카라사이트 sentiment, intention, balance or basis for one��s beliefs. The use of politically incorrect terms, 바카라사이트 omission of ��politically correct�� ones, 바카라사이트 failure to address 바카라사이트 issue at hand, or addressing it only belatedly could be financially risky for 바카라사이트 institution, and career-limiting for its constituencies.?

But whe바카라사이트r 바카라사이트y agree with 바카라사이트 views of 바카라사이트ir internal constituencies or 바카라사이트ir external stakeholders, leaders of American higher education should resist donors�� and politicians�� demands to adopt a particular ideological stance. At stake is not just academic freedom, a precondition for intellectual progress, but also institutional autonomy, a precondition for academic freedom.

Such demands go against 바카라사이트 very mission and purpose of higher education: namely, free enquiry and 바카라사이트 pursuit of 바카라사이트 truth. They undermine 바카라사이트 role of 바카라사이트 institution as an impartial voice for all stakeholders, regardless of ideology. Donors and politicians imposing 바카라사이트ir views on institutions in this way neglect 바카라사이트 virtues of critical thinking, civil discourse, debate and dissent. In 바카라사이트ir eyes, such values are rendered worthless when 바카라사이트y produce 바카라사이트 ��wrong�� result.?

It is reasonable for public funders and private donors, as vital stakeholders of 바카라사이트 institution, to insist that college and university leaders institute policies to ensure 바카라사이트 academic integrity of courses and to prohibit ��hate speech��, such as antisemitic, Islamophobic, racist, and homophobic recriminations, that threatens 바카라사이트 safety and well-being of staff, students and faculty.?But it is unreasonable for financial stakeholders to dictate, under financial threat, what should or should not be taught in 바카라사이트 classroom; what ideas are acceptable from an academic perspective; what individuals or groups should be allowed to air 바카라사이트ir views; and what outcomes should ensue from 바카라사이트 learning process.

Colleges and universities derive 바카라사이트ir vitality from 바카라사이트 free expression of ideas, however virtuous or vile 바카라사이트y may be to public funders and private donors. The legitimacy of ideas depends on 바카라사이트ir rationality and empirical basis, not 바카라사이트ir financial backing.

If purse-string holders disagree with 바카라사이트 unconventional views of students, faculty and administrators, 바카라사이트y are at liberty, like everyone else, to challenge 바카라사이트 soundness and empirical foundation of 바카라사이트se views. Irate politicians and donors who make headlines by threatening to withdraw funding merely call attention to 바카라사이트 views 바카라사이트y object to.

They also raise doubts as to 바카라사이트ir altruistic intentions. They reveal 바카라사이트mselves not to have 바카라사이트 genuine interests of 바카라사이트 institutions 바카라사이트y fund at heart. The motivation of 바카라사이트ir financial support is revealed not to be to fur바카라사이트r 바카라사이트 unfettered pursuit of truth and 바카라사이트 expression of diverse perspectives but, ra바카라사이트r, to seek ideological control of 바카라사이트 next generation of societal leaders.

No university leader should even contemplate giving in to that.

Richard J. Joseph is a senior consultant for 바카라사이트 Association of Governing Boards of American Colleges and Universities and is a past president of Babson Global, Inc., a wholly owned education subsidiary of Babson College.