Viewpoint Diversity and Freedom of Expression Are Campus Essentials

The universities need to strengthen, not coddle

“He who knows only his side of the case, knows little of that.”

-       John Stuart Mill

A Mental Gym

At a time when many people are wondering about the value of a college education, those who are in charge of those institutions would be well advised to recognize that their business should be a mental gym; a place where minds and souls are strengthened.

The off-putting image drawn by numerous news reports portrays colleges and universities as purveyors of weakness: close-minded and cosseted ideological seminaries instead of exciting places where ideas are formulated and debated.

The recent tales of college students who need cookies and Legos after the stress of a presidential election are not likely to attract people who already wonder if college is nothing more than a prolonged, expensive, and debilitating exercise in candor suppression and argument avoidance.

Once upon a time, viewpoint diversity was not only an important part of the academic experience; it was one of its key features. People expected to be exposed to new as well as classical thinking when they stepped upon a campus. They expected to have their minds and perspectives stretched.

Viewpoint diversity, with its related arguments and challenges, was an important part of an intellectual weight-lifting program.

The Need for Directness

Later on, a major justification for Affirmative Action preferences was that they provided viewpoint diversity. The assertion was that valuable insights would be automatically gained from exposure to racial and national origin diversity. That was before the woke fog descended on campuses and people began to flinch at the first hint of frank talk.

After years of outreach programs, it’s clear that if you want genuine viewpoint diversity, you can’t be indirect. You have to make a direct effort to recruit people with diverse viewpoints and then, once they are on-board, you need to protect their freedom of expression.

The Need for Viewpoint-Diverse Faculties

Recruiting students with diverse viewpoints is desirable, but let’s consider the vital question of who is standing in front of the classes. There are some university departments where viewpoint diversity plays a minor or even nonexistent role. Mathematics and engineering, for example, are unlikely to require vibrant debate in order to produce an appropriate learning environment, both for the faculty and the students.

Departments such as political science, history, sociology, and economics, however, are packed with subjects that deserve vigorous debate. If their students are to receive a serious education, it is important that they learn about competing theories and positions.

The natural tendency of critics is to cite the overwhelming representation of Democrats in such departments. A 2018 National Association of Scholars study by Mitchell Langbert focused on 51 colleges and universities among the top 60 ranked by U.S. News and World Report. It found this party breakdown in the following disciplines:

·         Political Science had 8.2 Democrats for every Republican.

·         Psychology had 16.8 Democrats for every Republican.

·         History had 17.4 Democrats for every Republican.

·         Philosophy had 17.5 Democrats for every Republican.

·         Classics had 27.3 Democrats for every Republican.

·         Sociology had 43.8 Democrats for every Republican.

·         English had 48.3 Democrats for every Republican.

·         Religion had 70 Democrats for every Republican.

·         Anthropology had 56 Democrats and no Republicans.

·         Communications had 108 Democrats and no Republicans.

Some of the subject areas require far deeper analysis. An anthropology department that lacks political viewpoint diversity has less of an obstacle than a political science department. You might think that the study of English literature is a politics-free zone, but there are reports that many English departments are more interested in searching for signs of racism, colonialism, sexism, and/or elements of queer theory.  That would signal the presence of a political bias that could discourage conservative and moderate applicants as well as, I would add, anyone with a love of literature.

In 2023, a study of 1,500 professors at four-year U.S. colleges and universities by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) looked at ideology rather than party affiliation. It found that 50 percent of the professors regarded themselves as liberal, 17 percent as moderate, and 26 percent as conservative.

That’s interesting in itself, but when the faculty members were asked if they ever chose to remain silent on subjects that might upset students, colleagues, or the administration, these are the percentages that said they have remained silent:

·         Liberals: 20 percent

·         Moderates: 34 percent

·         Conservatives: 58 percent

Even more troubling are the results when asked if their colleagues would discriminate against them based on their political beliefs:

·         Liberals: 19 percent

·         Moderates: 47 percent

·         Conservatives: 70 percent

When asked if there are cases in which it is acceptable to shout down speakers, these are the figures of those who agreed with such censorship:

·         Liberals: 63 percent

·         Moderates: 47 percent

·         Conservatives: 12 percent

That is particularly disturbing. Preserving freedom of expression is essential for discourse and inquiry. Losing it is lethal.

If a department is intellectually diverse, but people do not feel free to express their opinions, then any amount of viewpoint diversity is meaningless. If, on the other hand, a department protects freedom of expression but has no viewpoint diversity among its members, then any openness is expressed within an echo chamber. They may bravely defend the right to agree with one another.

Can a sociology, history, or political science department that lacks viewpoint diversity provide the vibrant intellectual give-and-take that is part of a serious education? Should such deficient departments be disbanded so a viable department can be constructed?

I believe those are valid questions. A vibrant department need not have large numbers of diverse views, but it needs the open expression of those views. It also needs to protect them within an atmosphere that does not chill or squelch speech.

The idea that an intellectual monotone is acceptable should be discarded. A sociology department that lacks viewpoint diversity is not a real sociology department. A history department that lacks viewpoint diversity is not a real history department. A political science department that lacks viewpoint diversity is not a real political science department. It is deceptive to pretend otherwise.

What Is to Be Done?

Reversing a viewpoint-deficiency via new hires is likely to be a slow process. In the interim, however, the department can bring in credible speakers and programs from the outside in order to overcome its deficiencies. It can announce to the students that learning about such viewpoints is an important part of their education.

Such outreach will declare that viewpoints deserve a serious hearing and not just a polite nod. In today’s world where students often live in social media silos, it will also reveal that there are – shock of shocks - other viewpoints.

The overall effect of this approach brings us back to the beginning of this essay. A university that promotes vigorous discussions is exercising the intellectual muscles of its students and its faculty.

Viewpoint diversity builds and requires toughness. The Marine Corps used to announce that it was looking for a few good men.

The universities should announce that they are looking for healthy arguments.