The Crisis of Academic Standards

by Jeffrey Hart

Around college campuses there had been trouble when several campus newspapers printed an ad by David Horowitz listing ten reasons to oppose slavery reparations for black Americans.

About two-thirds of the newspapers approached by Horowitz turned down the ad. The rest, which published it, issued craven apologies for doing so. The only exception was Brown, where the editor insisted on his right to publish that side of the argument. Black student activists at Brown confiscated the press run of the newspaper. The Brown administration, while condemning this property theft, has—of course—done nothing against the student black activists.

I myself reviewed Horowitz’s arguments and found them mostly sound. But that was not the issue at stake.

Of course, there is no chance whatsoever of the U.S. Congress passing legislation mandating reparations to blacks living today because of slavery that was abolished generations ago.

The reason for this issue being raised is a pervasive sense of black grievance—more claims to the power weapon of Victim Status.

Then the question becomes one of whether black activists on campus have a veto power over anyone who openly questions their assertions.

Well, the very independent conservative campus newspaper The Dartmouth Review went ahead and ran the Horowitz ad. The official student newspaper had rejected it as "divisive."

Black undergraduates criticized the Review, using the usual charge of "racist," their vocabulary and capacity for argument being evidently paralyzed.

Worse still, The Dartmouth Review sponsored an appearance on the campus by Dinesh D’Souza, who would conduct discussions and make appearances on assorted topics. But he was to debate a distinguished Dartmouth professor of government on the topic "Affirmative Action and the Crisis of Academic Standards."

Mr. D’Souza, by the way, is a very distinguished and civilized person. Born in Bombay, he graduated from Dartmouth in the Class of 1983. Two of his several books are of the first importance. Illiberal Education was a best-seller, was respectfully reviewed, and explored the effects of affirmative action in five major universities. The End of Racism argued that the problems of American blacks today are mostly a result of their particular subculture: illegitimacy, crime, educational shortfall, and so on. He has a new book out entitled The Virtue of Prosperity, celebrating the free market, and the society of opportunity.

On top of all this, he was a domestic policy advisor in the Reagan administration and is now a Fellow of the American Enterprise Institute.

Now, questions arose as to what form would the protest take. They were not very serious, but indicative nevertheless.

There was some trouble, humorous in its way, about reserving a College auditorium for the debate, despite the fact that the government professor endorsed affirmative action. But that was worked out.

Then a female undergraduate flooded the email system with the following message, quoted verbatim:

Please read all this!

3. WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING!!!! At least show up and crash his smokescreen academic KKK meeting.

Communication, as anyone can see from her rhetoric. Yet she believes with certainty that everyone from the President of the College to the Government Department, and on to D’Souza and his debate opponent are in some sort of "racist" conspiracy.

The President of the College ("Jim") is bullied as a hypocrite, ("ha-ha") and probably a secret "racist," as is the GOVY DEPARTMENT. Both the President and the Department are very liberal and support affirmative action.

Mr. D’Souza is smeared as "this notorious racist academician." Of course he is not a "racist," though he opposes affirmative action—as do the vast majority of Americans. He is not "notorious" and he is not an "academician." He has held no academic posts.

On her Point 2, the student posits some sort of absurd conspiracy on the part of the Government Department and the College Republicans. The claim is that they did not publicize the debate, not wanting "liberals" to turn up and be heard. Apparently she was unaware the government professor debating D’Souza is a well known as a liberal.

(I enjoy such phraseology here as "a friend put me down to the college repubs bulletin which . . .")

In fact, the debate was very well advertised on campus and in the local, off-campus newspaper. The auditorium was packed.

As a final touch, she characterizes this coming debate between two civilized and very well informed people as an "academic KKK meeting."

The problem here is that this undergraduate is virtually illiterate. She certainly does not belong at a selective institution.

The problem is, more seriously, that no one takes her aside to tell her that her assertions are stupid, unworthy, and unacceptable. And that she thinks she has the prerogative of suspending debate is ridiculous.

During the debate, there was no disruption. Except that someone who did not want the debate to happen set off a fire alarm in the building. But the debate went on anyway and was fascinating. I learned from it, and will report on it.