For years, many of us have been writing about the decline in viewpoint diversity and the rise of an academic orthodoxy in higher education. It is one of the focuses of my new book, The Indispensable Right. Despite the calls for greater tolerance, the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) just elected a new president who has been criticized for being overtly hostile to conservative viewpoints and candidates. Todd Wolfson, a Rutgers University anthropologist, is an ally for those who continue to oppose intellectual diversity in favor of ideological orthodoxy in higher education.Wolfson is the author of “Digital Rebellion: The Birth of the Cyber Left.”Given the hostile environment faced by conservatives, Republicans, and libertarians today, one would think that anyone contemplating this position would strive to project neutrality and tolerance. That does not appear to be the style of Professor Wolfson.Instead, he immediately fulfilled the stereotype laid out by Vance:
“With Vance, American Far-Right authoritarians have succeeded in elevating a fascist who vows to ‘aggressively attack universities in this country’ to within striking distance of their goal: the annihilation of American higher education as we know it.”
He added:
Vance’s labeling of professors as “the enemy” and his praise of Hungarian dictator Viktor Orbán’s seizure of state universities as “the closest that conservatives have ever gotten to successfully dealing with leftwing domination of universities” are unambiguous. Should he and the dark-money funders backing him gain power, they aim to take control of American higher education and bend it to their will. Ironically, they would use fear and misinformation to turn colleges and universities into what the Far Right has for years falsely accused them of being: ideological indoctrination centers. …
While attacks on American higher education are nothing new, the scope of the Project 2025 blueprint for a Trump-Vance presidency offers a frightening glimpse into an authoritarian future that would transform American colleges and universities into thought-control factories by stifling ideas, silencing debate, and destroying autonomy. Project 2025 would roll back decades of progress on access to higher education, eliminate protections for LGBTQ+ students and sexual assault survivors, privatize student loans, end loan forgiveness, and, if we take its authors at their word, abolish the Department of Education entirely. We cannot afford to let this happen.
So in one statement, Wolfson not only officially opposed the Republican ticket as an existential threat to higher education but made defeating such views an objective of the organization.
There is not a single line recognizing the lack of diversity of viewpoints at most universities or polling showing that both students and faculty are now engaging in widespread self-censorship under administrators and academics like himself.
A survey conducted by the Harvard Crimson shows that more than three-quarters of Harvard Arts and Sciences and School of Engineering and Applied Sciences faculty respondents identified as “liberal” or “very liberal.” Only 2.5% identified as “conservative,” and only 0.4% as “very conservative.”
Likewise, a study by Georgetown University’s Kevin Tobia and MIT’s Eric Martinez found that only nine percent of law school professors identify as conservative at the top 50 law schools. Notably, a 2017 study found 15 percent of faculties were conservative. Another study found that 33 out of 65 departments lacked a single conservative faculty member.
Some sites like Above the Law have supported the exclusion of conservative faculty. Senior Editor Joe Patrice defended “predominantly liberal faculties” by arguing that hiring a conservative law professor is akin to allowing a believer in geocentrism to teach at a university. So the views of roughly half of the judiciary and half of the country are treated as legitimately excluded as intellectually invalid.
Given this hostility, it is hardly surprising that polls show faculty and students are less comfortable discussing their views or values in higher education.
The study shows that 70 percent of students “believe that speech can be as damaging as physical violence.” It also shows the impact of speech codes and regulations with two out of three students reporting that they “self-censor” during classroom discussions.
Not surprisingly, Republican students are the most likely to self-censor given the purging of conservative faculty and the viewpoint intolerance shown on most campuses.
Some 49 percent of Republican students report self-censoring on three or more topics. Independents are the second most likely at 40 percent. Some 38 percent of Democrats admit to self-censuring.
These surveys and studies on the reduction of conservative or libertarian faculty show that the far left has achieved precisely what Wolfson describes as a successful effort “to take control of American higher education and bend it to their will.”
This was an opportunity for Wolfson and the AAUP to reassure the many conservative and libertarian students and faculty. In the face of dwindling numbers of conservative and libertarian faculty, they could have voiced a commitment to resist ideological agendas from either the left or the right. It was a chance to push back on the hyperbole while acknowledging that work must be done to regain the lost trust in academia, which is now at record lows.
Instead, Wolfson has doubled down on political language and orthodox policies. That could hardly come as a surprise for the faculty who elected him. Wolfson told Inside Higher Ed he wants to make AAUP “a fighting organization.”
Wolfson’s response is reminiscent of how the AAUP has solicited papers on conservative intolerance in higher education while omitting liberal intolerance. It was an almost laughable agenda given the purging or dramatic reduction of conservatives from most faculties over the last couple decades.
As my book discusses, the AAUP was once the bastion of free speech and academic integrity values. It opposed the invasion of politics into higher education. However, it has become captured by the same forces that have converted our campuses into intolerance spaces for many faculty and students.
Wolfson has been widely criticized for the move by AAUP to reverse its long-standing opposition to academic boycotts, a move that is viewed as targeting Israeli institutions. It is clearly part of his move to make AAUP even more of a “fighting organization” and he has insisted that “collective action of all sorts does not necessarily come into and undermine academic freedom.”
Wolfson’s election shows how the objections of so many at the lack of intellectual diversity and tolerance are having little impact on faculty. When elected officials threaten reductions in support, these same academics are outraged by the attacks on higher education. Many offer perfunctory commitments to intellectual diversity while doing little to achieve it. As shown here, they are continuing to maintain and expand the culture that is suffocating our scholastic programs on every level.
Here is his faculty bio:
“Todd Wolfson’s research focuses on the intersection of new media and contemporary social movements and he is author of “Digital Rebellion: The Birth of the Cyber Left” and co-editor of the forthcoming volume, “Great Refusal: Herbert Marcuse and Contemporary Social Movements.” Wolfson believes in the importance of engaged scholarship that leads to tangible action in the world, and to that end, he is a co-founder of the Media Mobilizing Project (MMP) based in Philadelphia, PA. MMP is an award-winning organization that aims is to use new media and communications to build a movement of poor and working people, united across color lines. MMP’s work has been supported by the Knight Foundation, Ford Foundation, Kellogg Foundation, Media and Democracy Coalition, and Media Democracy Fund amongst others.”
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. He is the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage” (Simon & Schuster).
An Association of University Professors is, by definition, a Politically Correct NeoMarxist organization.
University campuses: as per Professor Michael Sugrue: theme parks for endangered Marxist species.
What is intellectual diversity? The gobbledygook word of the week? What’s on the books for next week? Seriously, the American public has no need, or want, for this fake intellectual grandstanding. All the dope-bump comments will be forgotten in 5mins or so..
..it’s striking that Wolfson and Jack Smith look menacingly alike… Let’s put this into perspective. The epitome of the ‘Classic Liberal’ is Alan Dershowitz, . I absolutely agree with him that those calling themselves ‘Liberal’ or ‘Very Liberal’ to-day are so far left of the ‘Classic Liberal,’ they have become the ‘Reactionary Right as they have pushed out of the Left Boundaries and started the Circle again at the top, where Fascism starts.. i.e., they are way beyond ‘Liberal..’ Colleges, especially the more elite, have always leaned toward ‘Liberalism,’ even in my day.. nothing new.. but.. to-day’s brand is contemptuous: Intransigent, Intolerant, Inflammatory and Un-Humanitarian, Un-Diplomatic, Un-Empathetic. so much for real change, which requires compromise.
Anthropology, another costly educational career fora high paying job for a productive citizen. Yes Kurt, the white European people that advanced western civilization to its peak providing millions with better lives, liberty and individual wealth was a wonder during the last century. History shows that it only fell due to corruption of its government and outside Communist influences. During its last days, cultural practices included men pretending to be women, mutilation of their children and a total loss of any semblance of morality. Yes Kurt, it truly is mind boggling.
OT: Are you watching as the Democrats are building a wall around their communist convention? Snow plows and barricades, I wonder if pallets of bricks will mysteriously show up in the surrounding streets?
Knight; Ford; Kellogg; don’t these funding organizations evaluate who they are going to fund?
There’s where one attack on Wolfson must begin — perhaps these organizations should receive a complimentary copy of Prof. Turley’s book, the Indispensible Right……..to remember how it is their organizations got to the level of wealth they’ve achieved currently and to realize they are ‘aiding and abetting’ the destruction of what was best about our academic university system back in the day.
I stopped giving to Rutgers when they disinvited Condil Rice to speak at a graduation ceremony.
I do not take their phone calls and countless mail solicitations any heed. A 1966 200th anniversary class
graduate and a once proud alumnus.
“. . . the decline in viewpoint diversity and the rise of an academic orthodoxy in higher education.” (JT)
Want to exclude opposing ideas in academia, but are intellectually bankrupt? Smear your opponents as lepers:
“Conservatives are against knowledge and reason. [. . .] Conservatism is based on patriarchy, hatred, racism, xenophobia, and religious dogma.”
Here’s how delusional that is:
Daniel Boorstin was long a history prof at U Chicago, then the Librarian of Congress. He hated knowledge so much that he wrote over twenty books — including the magnificent “Knowledge Trilogy:” _the Discoverers_, _The Creators_, _The Seekers_.
Boorstin is considered a conservative scholar.
Will Durant wrote the magisterial _The Story of Civilization_, 11 books that span the sweep of human history. I think that counts as a significant contribution to the stock of human knowledge.
Durant is also considered a conservative scholar.
The malicious caricatures of conservative scholars are intentional. We don’t debate lepers. We ship them off to an isolated colony.
Conservatism is not an ideology, it is the correct observation that most change FAILS, and that therefore we should proceed carefully when we seek to change things. That what exists – even if flawed works and that it likely works better than something new.
That does not mean we should sit still, that we should never change – even if 9 out of 10 changes fail – one is a significant improvement.
One of the many reasons for limited government is to experiment with change outside of government where failure is catastrophic.
John Say: first of all, MAGA and conservatism are not the same thing at all. True conservatives not only eschew MAGA and its sociopathic head, they formed The Lincoln Project, and write for The Bulwark. They write books like “Everything Trump Touches Dies” by Rick Wilson–highly recommended. True conservatives and religiously devout people are appalled by Trump, his enclless lying, racism, misogyny, and the crimes he has committed that he thinks he should be allowed to pardon himself for.
Secondly, most Americans do not agree with Project 2025. Trump has tried to lie about his involvement with the Heritage Foundation and knowing those involved in this “blueprint” for America, but it’s not working. Recently, dozens of videos about those involved with Project 2025 were unearthed and published. Most of the authors either worked in the Trump administration or otherwise have ties to him. J.D. Vance wrote a foreword. Americans don’t want most of what Project 2025 calls for–excerpted from “Wikipedia”
The plan proposes taking partisan control of the Department of Justice (DOJ), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Department of Commerce, Federal Communications Commission (FCC), and Federal Trade Commission (FTC), dismantling the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and reducing environmental and climate change regulations to favor fossil fuels.[18][21] The blueprint seeks to institute tax cuts,[22] but its writers disagree on protectionism.[23] It recommends abolishing the Department of Education, whose programs would be transferred or terminated.[24][25] Funding for climate research would be cut,[26] and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) would be reformed along conservative principles[vague].[27] The project seeks to cut Medicare and Medicaid,[28][29] and urges the government to explicitly reject abortion as health care.[30][31] The project seeks to eliminate coverage of emergency contraception[28] and enforce the Comstock Act to prosecute those who send and receive contraceptives and abortion pills.[31][32] It proposes criminalizing pornography,[33][34] removing legal protections against discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity,[34][35] and terminating diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs[5][35] and affirmative action[36] by having the DOJ prosecute “anti-white racism”.[37] The Project recommends the arrest, detention, and deportation of illegal immigrants.[38][39][40] It proposes deploying the military for domestic law enforcement.[41] It promotes capital punishment and the speedy “finality” of those sentences.[42][43] It hopes to undo “[al]most everything implemented” by the Biden Administration.[44]”.
Elimination of the Department of Education would remove protections for poor and special-needs children. MAGA wants to push more money for vouchers, the overwelming nuimber of which go to religious based schools, the money for which comes from the coffers of public schools. Voucher and religious-based schools do NOT have to take special needs children, but public schools do. Programs to help special needs children succeed are expensive. For poor kids, vouchers usually do NOT cover the entire cost for tuition, so because poor kids can’t afford to pay the balance, they can’t go to private scools, which turns them into enclaves for children from wealthier families paid for by cuts to public shools and programs for special needs kids. The net result would be that poor and special needs kids would be pushed into public schools with less funding than they have now to meet their needs, making the American promise of a free and appropriate education just a dream Most Americans oppose eliminating the Department of Education.
You speak of the alleged desirability of “limited governemnt”. Project 2025 would institute the unitarian executive theory–something anathema to our founding fathers–with a president who controls everything–the DOJ, FBI, all agencies and their agendas. This is contrary to the wishes and desires of most Americans. Trouble is, Trump is more than willing to lie if he loses again, and more than willing to start another insurrection. MAGAs have been placed in election positions in several key battleground states, intent on trying to help Trump cheat his way into office again by denying the results if he loses. Just like those who signed fake Electoral College certificates, these loses will also BE PROSECUTED. They’ll go to prison too.
(and how much of the above^wording actually represents something coming from Gigi or something non-attributed to the source? For a alleged lawyer, GIgi sure needs to learn about quotation marks and proper attribution. (was she attributing her second paragraph to Wiki?) Ancestry.com links her to Joe Biden for this attribute.
I left out the quotation mark from the beginning of the excerpt. And, you spent more time criticizing me than looking up whether this is actually what Wikipedia says. What did I get wrong? What did Wikipedia get wrong? I left in the references to footnotes that provide a citation to exactly what is written in the piece.
Do you really believe that most Americans are going to stand still for Donald J. Trump to be king, fire tens of thousands of civil servants and replace them with syncophants who will do what they are told, for using the FBI and DOJ to go after people who criticized him, to pull funding for Ukraine so Putin can “win”, to enact more tariffs (he still doesn’t understand that the cost of the tariffs is passed on to consumers–no wonder he doesn’t want anyone to see his grade transcripts from Wharton) or any of the other agenda items in Project 2025?
LOL. Uh-huh. Idiot
*LORETTA
Sure, John Say, but government is where the truly huge gob of money is including the treasury and all that printable paper.
*LORETTA
In the year 2000 the national debt was approx 6 BILLION. The theft began. The counterfeit began. 24 years later the national debt is 33 TRILLION. It’s about money and theft and the rest is BS.
The little fires of racism, lgbt, trans children, the border, voting schemes, abortion and all the rest are just firestarters to deflect ADHD people.
It’s about 33 trillion dollars and nothing else. The small change in endowments and other looting is nothing.. where else can trillions of dollars be stolen except within the USA federal government.
There comes a time where free men say no more. That time is upon us.
What are you proposing? When you talk in such vague language, how do we know whether you’ve thought it through?
What do you care, canadian or californian? You are not a free man.
Traveler was clear except for those who detest the idea of free speech.
*SENATOR KEELEY
Mr. Wolfson, you have no clothes on.
This what happens when people are swindled of the truth. Lia Thomas is a man.
* is
The borders are not secure.
There’s runaway inflation.
People are homeless.
Mr. Wolfson is a swindler.
Mr. Wolfson is nekked.
*SENATOR KEELEY
Mr. Wolfson must be a fine anthropologist. Oh, Professor Wolfson, pardon.
Fact Check: 100% True.
Endorsed.
Several Ivy League school presidents have been fired and a dozen CEO’s, of major companies, have sworn off hiring student’s from certain schools.
Based on that anecdotal evidence, One assumes that we’re approaching a tipping point at which this trend reverses . . . although thus far . . . One would be wrong!
at which this trend reverses . . . although thus far . . . One would be wrong!
You would be wrong, sadly. As i stated in an earlier comment today, there are students / medical science trainees who do the deep work of scientific research reading. However, they are in the minority and the trend is in the opposite direction. For example:
MIT leaders describe the experience of not renewing its largest journal contract as overwhelmingly positive…..Most faculty have been supportive of the Libraries in taking a principled stand in line with MIT values and are finding alternative means of access to needed research without an Elsevier subscription. Four years out, the faculty who continue to be most challenged by lack of immediate access are in the life sciences.
https://sparcopen.org/our-work/big-deal-knowledge-base/unbundling-profiles/mit-libraries/
A former JAMA editor commented on the above MIT article via Twitter/X:
Ed Livingston
@ehlJAMA
The same thing happened with the University of California. They canceled their Elsevier contract and were expecting a huge backlash. After about a year, one of the librarians told me that they were surprised that almost nobody complained.
When I was at JAMA, we did a survey of young clinicians to find out how they acquire medical information. They told us they got it from UpToDate, Wikipedia and podcasts. They specifically said they don’t read journals or textbooks.
https://x.com/ehlJAMA/status/1824440736840094089
TL; DR: doing the hard work of reading scientific literature is shunned by most mediocre students who get accepted to medical school and PhD science programs.
The Left doesn’t require Life Sciences as they are the Culture of Death. Unfortunately, this attitude permeates the university leadership, followed by the students.
There are some seriously brilliant professors at MIT even now.
I know your cult leader doesn’t like you to read articles written by women. But you might want to try to understand what some women think by taking the time to read what they write.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/aug/17/jd-vance-women
“I like how ho-hum it is that businesses in Chicago are boarding up for the DNC. Like it’s not even news. We’ve just accepted that it’s a normal part of life that whenever the Left might be mad about something they get to smash stuff if they want to.”
*SENATOR KEELEY
Has anyone read Wolfson’s book? Cyber Left? It’s an attack on liberals and conservatives?
Wolfson is a supposed anthropologist. Reasearch his scholarship. It’s probably as good as Claudine Gay’s.
He’s not a Constitution scholar.
I’m sure it will be mostly peaceful protests
Democrats don’t even know what a woman is.
Democrats want to make it okay for biological men to get in the boxing ring and beat the sh*t out of a woman.
Democrats want to gut Title 9 protections for women so that biological men will be allowed into their locker rooms, dorm rooms, sporting rings, and bathrooms — to hell with the rights of women to feel safe in their own spaces.
As for the Democrat convention, where they have to PAY celebrities, influencers, and attendees — the DNC will have opportunities to visit the mobile Abortion van, or the mobile Vasectomy van.
I see no issue with this because the less the Lunatic Left procreates, the better it is for the world.
And the cult leader was responsible for sexual assault. Oh so much more fun that is right? Rape it’s called. As well as fraud in his business, 34 counts, Felonies.
Yep, the cult leader is such a wonderful man.
Do you plan on committing rape when if your cult leader is elected?
I see a cult ib the left not the right. I have no leader. But I have enemies
“I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.”
Are you one ? Does your cult enslave you or give your mind liberty ?
Are you free to believe differently from those within your cult ?
Was Jussee Smollet accosted by MAGA Hat wearing racists in Chicago ?
There have been sdo many lies – why should anyone believe you about anything ?
The real jury of the american people returned an acquittal.
The 18th was repealed by the 21st; America couldn’t take anymore.
*SENATOR KEELEY
You should not speak of the ayotollah like that. Praise be to spaneetoo.
As is typical you have taken a quote out of context and pretended it means more than it dfoes.
And then sold it to women.
I do not think its Vance’s views on women that are strange – so much as yours.
Do you really beleive most women are stupid enough to buy your schiff.
If I and Trump and Vance are wrong in that it would be because we overestimate the intelligence of most women – while you underestimate them, as well as all other minorities treating their minds as your property – to be filled only with what you want them to know.
*LORETTA
Most women shop. It’s a part of what women do. The reason is from caveman days. Women gathered. Instead of gathering berries and other edibles in the wild, they gather shoes, handbags, ornaments of every kind. Shopping satisfies the gathering need of her psyche while men golf. That ball will surely hit an enemy of some animal food source and those baseballs whew!
The Guardian LMAO
Even chatgpt called it unreliable and not a source of information.
The Guardian is a cult publication.
One of the symptoms of a cult is that they will act (vote) against their own self interests based on the hive mentality.
Get out of the cult while you still can, bruh!
* I know how your cult leader …..
Scanned the article. Why would Vance’s mother in law stay for a year after the birth of his child? That’s a long stay? Where was grampa? His wife was back at work?
Why would a woman have babies just to leave them at daycare? What is more important than the precious time with the child? Make a choice.
“In the wild” post menopausal women do take care of the children and eventually must rely on either a son or daughter’s household for a bowl of food . Some of the most dangerous females are post menopausal women because it’s all about offspring. Mr. Vance should watch his back.
Middle aged women when they can no longer attract males will beat up other females for food and needs. Prepare your future?
All of it is basic biology and behavioral biology in the wild. Cultures colliding can be a behavioral problem.
Wolfson is an anthropologist? Seriously. .
Name something Democrats have not ruined.
How about China?
Understanding that communists are democrats, the one-child policy of the communists and democrats will have ultimately killed China by way of an immutable population imbalance.
China may have a viable option for survival, however: Taking over the world.
Democrats: “If we could just jail Trump, get rid of MAGA, end the Electoral College, stack the Supreme Court, ban voter ID, and censor free speech, we could save democracy.”
There it is!
I’m still thinking…
Still thinking….
The Deep State alliance between the corrupt trinity: CIA, FBI, and Secret Service:
Gotta love the subtitle ZeroHedge slapped under that headline on their repost of this story: “Hopefully there was a baby involved”…
Allen Dulles, J. Edgar Hoover, US Secret Service, JCS, SecDef, DIA, NSA, Big Texas Oil, Lyndon Johnson et al. secured the assassination of JFK in 1963 as Deep Deep State Executive Action.