Sure it’s fun to mock the p.c. crowd, but this is p.c. on steroids. Greg Lukianoff, founder of FIRE (Foundation For Individual Rights In Education) sees a new threat on the doorstep:
“In 2011, the Department of Education took a hatchet to due process protections for students accused of sexual misconduct. Now the Department of Education has enlisted the help of the Department of Justice to mandate campus speech codes so broad that virtually every student will regularly violate them.’
The kind of corruption we saw coming out of the IRS is of a piece, too.
More from the article:
‘Among the forms of expression now punishable on America’s campuses by order of the federal government are:
-
Any expression related to sexual topics that offends any person. This leaves a wide range of expressive activity—a campus performance of “The Vagina Monologues,” a presentation on safe sex practices, a debate about sexual morality, a discussion of gay marriage, or a classroom lecture on Vladimir Nabokov’s Lolita—subject to discipline.
-
Any sexually themed joke overheard by any person who finds that joke offensive for any reason.
-
Any request for dates or any flirtation that is not welcomed by the recipient of such a request or flirtation.’
This blog would like to make a brief appeal:
Without glossing too much over the historical record nor the clear moral wrongs of this country’s legacy and institutions to black folks: The above approach is closing doors you might want to keep open. No one can take away the civil rights ethos of your elders that’s been passed down to you. It’s been vital in carving out space for freedom, inclusion under the law, truth, wisdom, safety, dignity and common purpose. It’s your legacy.
That said, the playing field has changed and will continue to change. Activists and progressive political coalitions like the ones we have in power will by their nature churn out bad, restrictive laws that tend to favor a few (usually themselves and their cronies) in the name of all. Every law that can be used to favor your interests, can be used against your interests.
To appeal further, hopefully beyond the typical libertarian argument (freedom vs. coercion, the individual vs. the State) I would say such progressive activism can harm the soil out of which future generations will grow: The church through onerous regulations and laws which contradict church doctrine, the neighborhood through a weakened and stagnant economy, the healthy bonds that can unite different groups society-wide by encouraging political favoritism and corruption which erodes the public trust.
What am I missing?
Related On This Site: Greg Lukianoff At FIRE.Org: ‘Emily Bazelon And The Danger Of Bringing “Anti-Bullying” Laws To Campus’
From Volokh: ‘Conservatives, Libertarians, and Civil Rights History’…Libertarianism In The Mainstream?: Rand Paul In The Spotlight…Thomas Sowell archives here.
What about black people held in bondage by the laws..the liberation theology of Rev Wright…the progressive vision and the folks over at the Nation gathered piously around John Brown’s body?: Milton Friedman Via Youtube: ‘Responsibility To The Poor’……Robert George And Cornel West At Bloggingheads: “The Scandal Of The Cross”…
Chris, well said. I might add something to the effect that if we are not allowed to act irresponsibly how on earth can we learn what it means to act responsibly?
Malcolm, thanks. I remember you having written about this. It’s a good point to make.