‘Diversity’ And ‘Academic Freedom’ Are Just Left-Wing Buzzwords
Academia uses “academic freedom” in the same way it uses “diversity” — as a way to exclude anyone who rejects left-wing identity ideology.Academia uses “academic freedom” in the same way it uses “diversity” — as a way to exclude anyone who rejects left-wing identity ideology.Notre Dame Admin Defends University-Sponsored Drag Show Under The Guise Of ‘Academic Freedom’
Students opposed to the school-sponsored event plan to host a rosary rally outside the performance on Nov. 3 if the show is not canceled.Does Tenure Protect Academic Freedom — Or Academic Mediocrity?
Academic freedom has become a red herring to argue for the need for tenure. Here is why tenure is not serving the public good.Stanford University professor of medicine who challenged COVID lockdowns: 'Academic freedom is dead'
A tenured Stanford professor who called into question the efficacy of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, lockdowns, masking for infants, and Dr. Anthony Fauci's recommendations throughout the pandemic gave a damning evaluation of the state of critical thought and academic freedom earlier this month, suggesting that they are not dying on campus but dead.
Thought crimes
Dr. Jay Bhattacharya is a tenured professor of medicine at Stanford University, where he directs the Stanford Center on the Demography of Health and Aging. He is also a research associate at the National Bureau of Economics Research and a senior fellow at the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
Earlier this month, Bhattacharya raised the matter of a censorious and dialogue-averse university community at the Academic Freedom Conference at Stanford's Graduate School of Business. Perhaps unsurprisingly, the conference was met with fierce opposition in the days and weeks leading up to the event.
The aim of the conference was "to identify ways to restore academic freedom, open inquiry and freedom of speech and expression on campus and in the larger culture."
A host of Stanford academics signed an open letter accusing the observers of trolling Stanford with their talk of academic freedom, claiming that the event would not leave the university "unscathed."
The letter called on Stanford to "emphatically dissociate itself" from the event, going so far as to accuse gay Pay-Pal cofounder Peter Thiel, who made remarks at the event, of homophobia and other speakers of racism.
Those opposed to the event were altogether unable to prevent Bhattacharya from joining a panel titled, "Academic Freedom Applications: Climate Science and Biomedical Sciences," and stating, "We live in an era where ... you have a scientific bureaucrat who ironically tells the world that if you question him, you're not simply questioning the man, you're questioning science itself."
Bhattacharya was referencing Fauci's suggestion that by criticizing him — the scientist who ran the agency that funded dangerous gain-of-function research at the Wuhan lab — "you're really attacking not only Dr. Anthony Fauci, you're attacking science."
"We have a high clerisy that declares from on high what is true and what is not true," Bhattacharya suggested, adding that the collapse of academic freedom has accelerated significantly in the last two of the 36 years he has spent at Stanford.
"When you take a position that is at odds with the scientific clerisy, your life becomes a living hell," Bhattacharya told the conference. "You face a deeply hostile work environment."
He emphasized that while the university prides itself on having academic freedom, nothing could be further from the truth, especially when "academic freedom only matters when you take controversial positions."
Academic Freedom Applications Climate Science and Biomedical Sciences youtu.be
Bhattacharya expounded on his thinking in a recent interview with Fox News Digital, saying, "The basic premise is that if you don't have protection and academic freedom in the hard cases, when a faculty member has an idea that's unpopular among some of the other faculty – powerful faculty, or even the administration ... if they don't protect it in that case, then you don't have academic freedom at all."
"Power replaced the idea of truth as the guiding light," he added, noting how many scientific communities were cowed into uniformity and uncritical thinking during the pandemic.
Nothing against or outside the state's official narrative
Bhattacharya was one of three authors of the Oct. 4, 2020, "Great Barrington Declaration," a document expressing "grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies" and recommending instead a "focused protection" approach.
According to the declaration, public resources should be focused on those most vulnerable to succumbing to COVID-19. Everyone else who is at minimal risk should build up natural immunity and "resume life as normal."
Anticipating the fallout of lockdowns and school closures, Bhattacharya and his co-authors recommended that schools and universities remain open for in-person teaching; extracurricular activities resume; and low-risk adults work normally, rather from home.
At the Academic Freedom Conference, he noted that the purpose of the document was to "tell people that there was an alternative and that the scientific community had not coalesced around a single lockdown-focused policy ... that there was not a scientific consensus in favor of lockdown, that in fact many epidemiologists, many doctors, many other people – prominent people – disagreed with the consensus."
For publicly doubting claims advanced by the Biden administration and the media about the good of lockdowns, he was roundly castigated.
Last year, CNN called him "crazy" and accused him of spreading "dangerous COVID disinformation."
Fox News Digital reported that extra to the media, he was also denounced by so-called health leaders, including National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases director Anthony Fauci, who deemed his declaration "nonsense and very dangerous."
In his talk, Bhattacharya referenced former National Institutes of Health (NIH) director Dr. Francis Collins' letter to fellow health bureaucrats imploring them to issue a "quick and devastating published take down" of the declaration's premises.
\u201cNew email dump showing Anthony Fauci and Francis Collins coordinating a propaganda campaign to attack the Great Barrington declaration last October. More coming soon so here's a teaser...\u201d— Phil Magness (@Phil Magness) 1639776786
Bhattacharya previously told UnHerd that early in the pandemic, "there was a debate going on inside the scientific community, and Tony Fauci and the federal government of the United States could not abide that […] because they implemented an extraordinary policy that required absolute consensus."
While the government "suppressed and censored and smeared" independent thinkers and critical scientists, there was no support to be found on campus, only "a chill."
Bhattacharya said that one student who had sought to have the Stanford professor publicly discuss his declaration was reportedly met with "reprisals," given the prevailing noting that "platforming [Bhattacharya] was a dangerous thing."
Bhattacharya suggested that what is actually dangerous is refusing to platform opposing or alternate views: "If you have a legitimate scientific view, a legitimate policy view, to not speak of it ... sends a message that we do not care about the truth."
He indicted the university, particularly its leaders, suggesting that their refusal to support those on campus with differing viewpoints made it abundantly clear that "academic freedom is dead ... and if university leaders do not stand up for it, they do not deserve the positions they have."
Tenured UCLA professor retires early, claims 'the Woke takeover of higher education has ruined academic life'
Joseph H. Manson, a formerly tenured professor of anthropology at UCLA, has decided to retire early because "of Woke capture" at universities all across the land.
In a blog he posted on July 4, Manson described in great detail his frustrations with the intolerance of woke faculty members and graduate students, as well as the precipitous increase in "critical" studies, which view nearly all academic research — including STEM — through the lens of race, gender, sexual orientation, and other human "identities."
"[T]he Woke takeover of higher education has ruined academic life," Manson wrote.
To illustrate his point, Manson recounted the ostracization of his former colleague, P. Jeffrey Brantingham, a fellow anthropologist who had studied urban crime and developed a "predictive" algorithm which he then pitched to law enforcement. As a result of this research, the Graduate Students Association at UCLA publicly accused Brantingham of “entrench[ing] and naturaliz[ing] the criminalization of Blackness in the United States.” Brantingham was also referred to the vice chancellor for research, ostensibly in hopes that the vice chancellor would censure or otherwise sanction him.
Though Brantingham continues to teach and research in the department, he no longer participates in faculty meetings or events and has even had to reorient the course catalog so that his popular course called "The Ecology of Crime" is not listed too closely to the courses taught by colleagues who condemn his line of research.
In short, Brantingham has been "unpersoned." And Manson believes that other professors from across the country and in every academic discipline are at risk of meeting a similar fate because, Manson predicted, the woke tyranny on campus will only get worse.
"The younger faculty tend to be more Woke than their elders," Manson noted. "Administrators and student 'protesters' perform elaborately choreographed routines that end with the former enacting policies that they wanted to enact anyway, for which the latter’s public temper tantrums serve as a pretext."
Between the demonization of respectable scholars, the sheer number of woke faculty and grad students, and the frightening surge of "anti-Zionism, a.k.a. thinly disguised Jew-hatred," Manson said he's had enough.
"[M]ainstream U.S. higher education is morally and intellectually corrupt, beyond the possibility of self-repair, and therefore no longer a worthwhile setting in which to spend my time and effort," he stated.
In response to the blog post, UCLA spokesman Bill Kisliuk issued a statement, which reads in part, "UCLA is deeply committed to the free and open exchange of ideas and we strongly support the academic freedom of our scholars.
"We actively encourage respectful debate, but we also expect equity and fairness, even when people strongly disagree. We do not tolerate discrimination or harassment and, to that end, UCLA strongly condemns anti-Semitism and other forms of hatred."
Today's top stories
www.theblaze.com
freebeacon.com