university students

Submitted by miriam sherman (United States), Dec 29, 2002 at 09:20

To follow up on your comments about the increasingly evident lack of maturity and political biases of professors in our universities, which tends to radicalize and to stunt the intellectual development of students.

Last night I watched a c-span presentation: two supreme court judges posing to a roomful of students hypothetical political situations, inviting their feedback. The students were shockingly unable to find and defend a logical position. Most offered the kind of slippery humanistic views such as "if 'they' have beliefs different from ours, we have to respect that". Query from the justices: "no matter what those belief lead to?" That set up confusion in the students' minds, couldn't justify their statement, but also couldn't change it...(The question is paraphrased, because I don't remember the exact wording, but the general idea.) They exhibited a shocking lack of thoughtful, careful thinking. I think professors such as Foner and Gilmore are responsible for this, propounding their ideas and manipulating young minds.

Most of the students comments showed a real lack of patriotism, as though to support their nation automatically means to oppose any other system of governance. While against America's right to translate our values into actions, they seem to favor the rights of other less free and open societies to translate THEIR ideas into actions, based on values opposed to an open society like ours which they hate, blame for every ill and attack verbally and actually, almost with impunity.

Somehow the students want to justify such dangerous irresponsibility as "just", but they can't seem to find a reasonable way to do that, only an emotional
one which, I think professors like Foner and Gilmore foster rather than critical thinking.

I don't like the idea of labels such as leftists, but I do see what you mean. On college campuses these days, there is more emotion, more emphasis on"fairness", much less study and awareness of geopolitical realities and an inability to back up assertions with either facts or logical reasoning.

It's scary: these are our future politicians, teachers, parents?

Administrators at academic institutions fire qualified teachers and researchers simply because those are Israeli's, for example: they 'don't fit'. Is this educational freedom, or political/religious biases let loose in a supposedly free environment dedicated to mind development?

More and more I am noticing that professors and administrators of our universities
demonstrate a defensiveness about OPEN discussion: They claim to champion it, yet become actively hostile when they are criticized for choosing to allow more forums for speakers favorable to arab causes for example, than for critical examination of those causes by the opposites, israeli speakers who bring facts and history to oppose to political propaganda. More and more Departments of Islamic (middle eastern, muslim) Studies
(of which there are increasing numbers in our colleges headed by American Muslims)

present speakers, while there are far fewer from many fewer Departments of Hebraic (jewish, israeli, biblical) studies.


Academics claim they balance by presenting a speaker for the 'other' side. However, they fequently fail to do so for reasons which do not hold water, nor do they present both in the same forum so a real comparison and examination of data can be heard by the students. The students often will not attend forums, only the one that they favor: where's the balance?
(Perhaps academics fear for their reputations and endowments because it has been demonstrated time after time that pro-arab/muslim students become violent and abusive when their views are challenged. So for the sake of avoiding violence which would clearly show how reason and negotiation depart when demagoguery enters academics desert "fairness".

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".