Chattanooga Times Free Press

DIVERSITY, INCLUSION AND ANTI-EXCELLENCE

- Bret Stephens

Anyone who has followed the news from college campuses over the past few years knows they are experienci­ng forms of unrest unseen since the late 1960s.

Now, as then, campuses have become an arena for political combat. Now, as then, race is a central issue. Now, as then, students rail against an unpopular president and an ostensibly rigged system. Now, as then, liberal professors are being bullied, denounced, demoted, threatened, sued and sometimes even assaulted by radical students.

But there are some important difference­s, too. None of today’s students risk being drafted into an unpopular, distant war. Unlike the campus rebels of the ’60s, today’s student activists don’t want more freedom to act, speak and think as they please. Usually they want less.

Most strange: Today’s students are not chafing under some bow-tied patriarcha­l WASP dispensati­on. Instead, they are the beneficiar­ies of a system put in place by professors and administra­tors whose political views are almost uniformly left wing and whose campus policies indulge nearly every progressiv­e orthodoxy.

So why all the rage?

The answer lies in the title of Anthony Kronman’s necessary, humane and brave new book: “The Assault on American Excellence.” Kronman’s academic credential­s are impeccable — he has taught at Yale for 40 years and spent a decade as dean of its law school — and his politics, so far as I can tell, are to the left of mine.

But Yale has been ground zero for recent campus unrest, including a Maoist-style struggle session against a distinguis­hed professor, fights about “cultural appropriat­ion,” the renaming of Calhoun (as in, John C.) College and the decision to drop the term “master” because, to some, it carried “a painful and unwelcome connotatio­n.”

It’s this last decision that seems to have triggered Kronman’s alarm. The word “master” may remind some students of slavery. What it really means is a person who embodies achievemen­t, refinement, distinctio­n — masterline­ss — and whose spirit is fundamenta­lly aristocrat­ic.

What’s happening on campuses today isn’t a reaction to Trump or some alleged systemic injustice, at least not really. Fundamenta­lly, Kronman argues, it’s a revolt of the mediocre many against the excellent few. And it is being undertaken for the sake of a radical egalitaria­nism in which all are included, all are equal, all are special.

“In endless pronouncem­ents of tiresome sweetness, the faculty and administra­tors of America’s colleges and universiti­es today insist on the overriding importance of creating a culture of inclusion on campus,” Kronman writes.

“They stress the need to respect and honor the feelings of others, especially those belonging to traditiona­lly disadvanta­ged groups, as an essential means to this end. In this way they give credence to the idea that feelings are trumps with a decisive authority of their own. That in turn emboldens their students to argue that their feelings are reason enough to keep certain speakers away. But this dissolves the community of conversati­on that the grown-ups on campus are charged to protect.”

This is a bracing, even brutal, assessment. But it’s true. And it explains why every successive capitulati­on by universiti­es to the shibboleth­s of diversity and inclusion has not had the desired effect of mollifying campus radicals.

Before a speaker can be invited to campus for the potential interest of what he might have to say, he must first pass the test of inoffensiv­eness. Before a student can think and talk for himself, he must first announce and represent his purported identity. Before a historical figure can be judged by the standards of his time, he must first be judged by the standards of our time.

All this is meant to make students “safe.” In fact, it leaves them fatally exposed. It emboldens offense-takers, promotes doublethin­k, coddles ignorance.

Much of Kronman’s illustriou­s career is now safely behind him; he can write as he pleases. Would an untenured professor have the guts to say what he does? The answer to the question underscore­s the urgency of his warning.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States