9 thoughts on “U of Chicago Faculty Letter to the Students”

1. Pingback: University of Chicago Law School Shouldn’t Be a ‘Safe Space,’ Say Professors | Law Deluxe

2. Useful list for serious students to avoid as instructors.

3. Yeah, students have every right to speak up. But when universities allow large numbers of revolutionary young people to become courageous and daring pathbreakers, professors become harassed elderly intellectuals who get one opportunity to turn over a new leaf before being exposed, refuted, and completely discredited.

   Cue the destruction of the Four Olds – old customs, old habits, old culture, and old thinking – because Mao is back in town.

   • Do you have any examples at the U of Chicago (or anywhere else) where this Maoist revolution you warn us about has ever happened? Exactly how are students harassing these poor elderly tenured professors, with their six-figure salaries and tiny teaching loads, at the U of Chicago? Your idea that universities must not “allow” students to be “pathbreakers” lest they criticize the poor old professors, that sounds a lot more like Maoism to me.

     • I’m glad you asked. Have you read The Demands of students at 79 different universities nationwide? You MUST be aware of what happened at Yale, where students demanded the resignation of Associate Master of Silliman College Erika Christakis, or at Occidental College where students demanded the “immediate removal of President Veitech.” Surely that qualifies as harassment.

       But perhaps you’re not aware of other demands which didn’t make the headlines. Here are just a few.

       Kennesaw State University: “required cultural awareness, race and ethnicity, and intersectional LGBT diversity training for members of Greek Life and all student organizations on campus.” Not only that, but “no one should be exempt” and “staff members are not agents of respectability, nor are organization advisory boards breeding grounds for respectability politics; we will no longer accept the tone policing, political bias, and overarching reach of the power of organization advisors.”

       University of San Diego: “demand that representatives from the university’s administration acknowledge the colonialist legacy of Junípero Serra, who established the Catholic California mission system that massacred the vast majority of native peoples in California. We demand that Serra Hall be renamed to a designation chosen by a coalition of native students, staff and faculty.”

       University of North Carolina Chapel Hill: “We DEMAND that all administrators be compensated at the same rate as workers.”

       Tufts University: “We demand that if any of these demands are unable to be met we demand that the university make a public response explaining explicitly the rationale for the non-compliance.”

       University of North Carolina Chapel Hill: “We DEMAND the immediate firing of Margaret Spellings. And any future President of the UNC system must be decided collectively by students, staff, faculty, workers, and those living in North Carolina who are marginalized by the University space.”

       University of South Carolina: “We require that university personnel use personal gender pronouns as indicated by the individual.”

       Loyola University Maryland: “We demand Mandatory Racial Justice Training for all employees, faculty, staff, and new students. This training must be facilitated by a student-approved third party consultant.”

       There are literally hundreds more, and if you compare them to Mao’s “Sixteen Points” you discover striking similarities. Like Point 2: “The Main Current and the Zigzags: Large numbers of revolutionary young people, previously unknown, have become courageous and daring pathbreakers. … they argue things out, expose and criticize thoroughly, and launch resolute attacks on the open and hidden representatives of the bourgeoisie.” And Point 4: “Let the Masses Educate Themselves in the Movement.” And Point 8: “The Question of Cadres: The anti-Party, anti-socialist rightists must be fully exposed, refuted, overthrown and completely discredited and their influence eliminated. At the same time, they should be given a chance to turn over a new leaf.”

       As Mao said, “Because the resistance is fairly strong, there will be reversals and even repeated reversals … The struggle of the proletariat against the old ideas, culture, customs and habits left over by all the exploiting classes over thousands of years will necessarily take a very, very long time.” (See Point 9.)

       Maybe you agree with The Demands and maybe you don’t. If you dispute my assessment you would only be agreeing with Mao on Point 6, the “Correct Handling of Contradictions Among the People.”

       And if you work for a university, I would strongly urge you to read Point 12: “Policy Towards Scientists, Technicians and Ordinary Members of Working Staffs.” You wouldn’t want to be caught unawares…

       • You offer a lot of examples that have nothing to do with this topic. The fact that some people make demands, and are almost always ignored by universities, does not make it harassment.

     • You asked me, “Do you have any examples at the U of Chicago (or anywhere else) where this Maoist revolution you warn us about has ever happened?” I provided examples. Now you say my examples “have nothing to do with this topic.” Talk to me again when you encounter Point 12.

4. I would be interested to have the faculty be identified by their departments, or at least have a departmental breakdown. I understand no one from the law school faculty has signed, for instance.

5. Pingback: Chicago Law Faculty Do Not Join Letter Defending Trigger Warnings And Safe Spaces - Eric Allen Kauk

Comments are closed.