Rendering education non-negotiable

I grew up liking the American idea of the melting pot. At least in theory, people of all kinds of races, religions and backgrounds could come here and become assimilated Americans. Obviously, it didn’t work out for everyone, and institutionalized racial segregation and bigotry was an appalling example. But I always thought the theory — that we are all Americans — was a good one, and most people did. Which was why there was enormous sympathy and support for the Civil Rights movement and the Freedom Riders back in the 60s.

Today, the melting pot and assimilation have come under attack as never before. Multiculturalism, identity politics and diversity have rendered the melting pot  theory obsolete — so much so that speaking favorably about it has become politically incorrect. In fact, it can even get you into trouble at certain colleges.

If you think I’m making this up, think again.

Illinois State’s Code of Student Conduct contains a provision entitled “To Be an Illinois State University Student,” which sets forth a list of “non-negotiable values” at the university, including “civility,” “an appreciation of diversity,” and “individual and social responsibility.”

The policy then provides that

These values are the hallmark of the University, and will be protected diligently. Each person has the right and ability to make decisions about his or her own conduct. Just as importantly, each person has the responsibility to accept the consequences of those decisions. When individual behavior conflicts with the values of the University, the individual must choose whether to adapt his or her behavior to meet the needs of the community or to leave the University.(Emphasis added.)

So by the plain language of this policy, if a student’s expression or behavior deviates from the university’s definition of what it means to appreciate diversity or be socially responsible, that student may be asked to leave the university. 

Well, isn’t that just lovely. If I were a student there and said that I disliked hyphenated identity politics and liked the idea of the American melting pot and assimilation, I would run the risk of being expelled.

That such a thing could happen at a taxpayer-financed university is scary. (Freedom, of course, is nowhere listed as a value, much less a non-negotiable one.)

Can anyone imagine if a university stated that its “non-negotiable values” included patriotism or love of country? If it did, it would immediately be attacked by the same hypocrites who attacked ROTC as “odds with what we, as educators, hold sacrosanct.”

If Illinois State University’s non-negotiable “values” are at all typical of the universities today, the kids are not being educated. They are being swindled and should issue a demand for a refund. A non-negotiable demand. And why not? Their professors used to issue non-negotiable demands (even if they now call them “values”), so it is only fair to balance the karma now that they are old and in power.

“Academic freedom” my ass. These educators are at war with freedom.


Posted

in

by

Tags:

Comments

6 responses to “Rendering education non-negotiable”

  1. Kathy Kinsley Avatar
    Kathy Kinsley

    I don’t know… that language could be equally well used to oust a student who attacks females not wearing hijab…

  2. Kathy Kinsley Avatar
    Kathy Kinsley

    Problem is, it depends on “THEIR” definitions. Sigh.

  3. savaship Avatar

    In defense of the nation… you looked in Illinois, the metaphoric Nazi Germany of the United States of America. Do other state’s colleges have this kind of language written into their codes? I know St. Cloud in Minnesota pushed the “diversity” door pretty hard for awhile after a report came out stating the student body and faculty were racist.

  4. […] Rendering education non-negotiable […]

  5. […] For Tyranny Posted on December 10, 2012 1:30 pm by Bill Quick Classical Values » Rendering education non-negotiable Can anyone imagine if a university stated that its “non-negotiable values” included […]

  6. Erik Avatar
    Erik

    I came across this blog but after reading a few posts in which your opinions are displayed I am left wondering exactly what classical values you believe in?

    From what I can see it is a lot of postmodernist opinions and no classical ones.

    Melting pot is not a classical idea, it is a postmodernist idea. Not seeing the merit of stereotypes is the same there, postmodernist. A person of classical values would not go and lie next to a wild lion in Zimbabwe just because that perticular lion hasn’t proved to be dangerous yet.

    So what gives? How did you decide on the name “classical values”?