more academic legislative controversyStanley Kurtz links to several intersting articles about a bill in the House of Representatives that will effect the way some university programs are funded: Opponents of HR 3077 don’t like quoting the actual language of the bill, which does not ban opposition to American foreign policy, but simply calls for the inclusion of many viewpoints. Academics claim to be concerned about academic freedom, but they’ve long since choked off free debate at their own universities. What these professors really want is the freedom to go on suppressing any opposition to their own ideas. HR 3077 doesn’t take away anyone’s right to speak, think, or teach as they see fit. It simply encourages subsidized programs to expose students to many perspectives. If even that is too much to ask, then let area studies get along without special federal subsidies. It’s good enough for philosophy and art history.While the bill appears to have some intriguing merits, how is mandating educational cirriculum a conservative solution to this problem? What kind of government agency would ensure that class syllabi were fair and balanced? |
Comments:
Post a Comment
