2008 Woodie Awards
I have an op-ed in today’s Daily Princetonian explaining why the proposed “students bill of rights,” pushed by College Republicans and (sadly) supported by some mis-guided and mis-informed progressives, is a very bad idea. Do check it out. I hope Princeton students do not buy into the propaganda being put out by the College Republicans on this one, exemplified by this op-ed by Wyatt Yankus. He misleads his readers when he writes that “. . . correcting the problems that do exist does not require the same drastic measures that have been used by Students for Academic Freedom in other cases, and our SBOR reflects this difference.” First, the only ‘problem’ here is the College Republicans’ attempt to quelch the free exchange of ideas at Princeton University. Second, this is simply not what their bill says. You wouldn’t know that, however, because the College Republicans’ bill is not publicly available. I have obtained a copy, and it is indistinguishable from Horowitz’s. Below the fold, I have reprinted a press release that Free Exchange at Princeton sent out last Friday highlighting the similarities. (Let me make clear that Free Exchange at Princeton is in no way affiliated with the Princeton Progressive Nation).
Press Release: 4-5-2006
In Attacking the Free Exchange of Ideas on Princeton’s Campus, Nothing’s Too ‘Radical’ for Princeton’s College Republicans
As reported in yesterday’s Daily Princetonian, College Republicans President Alex Maugeri, described the contents of his organization’s Student Bill of Rights by stating that ex-Marxist-turned-right-wing extremist David “Horowitz’s model is ‘a bit too radical’ for Princeton and that the document has been revised to fit campus needs.” Yet, the striking similarity between the language of the College Republicans’ proposed bill, obtained today by Free Exchange at Princeton, and that of the “Academic Bill of Rights” offered by Horowitz, should lead students to question whether Maugeri and his associates are proposing anything significantly different from the “Academic Bill of Rights,” which has had a destructive effect on the learning environment at colleges and universities wherever it has been adopted.
What the CR Bill Says:
1. We affirm that students should be solely graded on the basis of their reasoned answers and appropriate knowledge of the subjects and disciplines they study; professors must never allow a student’s political affiliation or religious beliefs to negatively affect his/her academic performance.
What Horowitz’s Bill Says:
3. Students will be graded solely on the basis of their reasoned answers and appropriate knowledge of the subjects and disciplines they study, not on the basis of their political or religious beliefs.
What the CR Bill Says:
2. Teachers are entitled to freedom in teaching their subject as they see fit, but not to the point of political, ideological, religious or anti-religious indoctrination, or to the exclusion of other opinions or viewpoints. Such actions represent a violation of the principles of a student’s academic freedom and the principles of free and open sharing of ideas.
What Horowitz’s Bill Says:
5. Exposing students to the spectrum of significant scholarly viewpoints on the subjects examined in their courses is a major responsibility of faculty. Faculty will not use their courses for the purpose of political, ideological, religious or anti-religious indoctrination.
What the CR Bill Says:
4. An environment conducive to the civil exchange of ideas being an essential component of a free university, the obstruction of invited campus speakers, destruction of campus literature or other effort to obstruct this exchange will not be tolerated.
What Horowitz’s Bill Says:
7. An environment conducive to the civil exchange of ideas being an essential component of a free university, the obstruction of invited campus speakers, destruction of campus literature or other effort to obstruct this exchange will not be tolerated.
The College Republicans can change or add words, and alter the order in which they list the proposals. But it doesn’t obscure the truth about their bill: it’s just as radical as David Horowitz’s. We urge Princeton students not to support a referendum effort, and to vote ‘no’ on this right-wing attack on the free exchange of ideas at our University.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
Just another WordPress weblog
RSS 2.0
