Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Sarah Lawrence Prof pens Op-Ed about lack of intellectual diversity, social justice warriors want him driven off campus

Sarah Lawrence Prof pens Op-Ed about lack of intellectual diversity, social justice warriors want him driven off campus

Conservative Prof. Samuel Abrams becomes target of harassment and is thrown under bus by administration after his NY Times Op-Ed, proving his point.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kXdBFDRA_WM

Professor Samuel Abrams is a conservative-leaning tenured professor of politics at Sarah Lawrence College. He is active in Heterodox Academy, a group of almost 2000 academics devoted to intellectual diversity on campus.

Prof. Abrams recently wrote an op-ed for the New York Times about the lack of ideological diversity among administrators at his school and elsewhere. The column, titled Think Professors Are Liberal? Try School Administrators, brought together research Prof. Abrams had done on left-leaning bias among college professors and administrators, and how it stifles open debate.

This warped ideological distribution among college administrators should give our students and their families pause. To students who are in their first semester at school, I urge you not to accept unthinkingly what your campus administrators are telling you. Their ideological imbalance, coupled with their agenda-setting power, threatens the free and open exchange of ideas, which is precisely what we need to protect in higher education in these politically polarized times.

Prof. Abram’s op-ed triggered social justice activists on campus and not in a good way because the example he used to start his column concerned campus identity politics:

As a conservative-leaning professor who has long promoted a diversity of viewpoints among my (very liberal) faculty colleagues and in my classes, I was taken aback by the college’s sponsorship of such a politically lopsided event. The email also piqued my interest in what sorts of other nonacademic events were being organized by the school’s administrative staff members.

I soon learned that the Office of Student Affairs, which oversees a wide array of issues including student diversity and residence life, was organizing many overtly progressive events — programs with names like “Stay Healthy, Stay Woke,” “Microaggressions” and “Understanding White Privilege” — without offering any programming that offered a meaningful ideological alternative.

Robby Soave writes at Reason about the campus reaction:

Sarah Lawrence Professor’s Office Door Vandalized After He Criticized Leftist Bias

After penning an op-ed for The New York Times decrying the ideological homogeneity of his campus administration, a conservative-leaning professor at Sarah Lawrence College discovered intimidating messages—including demands that he quit his job—on the door of his office. The perpetrators had torn down the door’s decorations, which had included pictures of the professor’s family.

In the two weeks since the incident, Samuel Abrams, a tenured professor of politics at Sarah Lawrence, has repeatedly asked the college’s president, Cristle Collins Judd, to condemn the perpetrators’ actions and reiterate her support for free speech. But after sending a tepid campus-wide email that mentioned the importance of free expression, but mostly stressed her “commitment to diversity and inclusive excellence,” Judd spoke with Abrams over the phone; according to him, she accused him of “attacking” members of the community.

“She said I had created a hostile work environment,” Abrams said in an interview with Reason. “If [the op-ed] constitutes hate speech, then this is not a world that I want to be a part of.”

What’s more, when the two met in person, Judd implied that Abrams was on the market for a new job, he said.

“I am not on the job market,” he said. “I am tenured, I live in New York. Why would I go on the job market?”

Abrams interpreted Judd’s remarks as a suggestion that he might be better off leaving the school. Judd did not respond to a request for comment.

Take a look at what was put on his door:

There also appears to be a campaign to spread falsehoods about him.

Prof. Jacobson is familiar with these smear tactics from social justice activists, as they were used against him when he gave a lecture on free speech at Vassar College a year ago.

The Sarah Lawrence Phoenix has more on the hostile campus reaction:

Abrams cites a study he conducted of 900 administrators “whose work concerns the quality and character of a student’s experience on campus.” According to his study, liberal administrators outnumber their conservative counterparts by 12-to-one. In New England, the ratio is as high as 25-to-one.

“It appears that a fairly liberal student body is being taught by a very liberal professoriate — and socialized by an incredibly liberal group of administrators,” Abrams writes.

He closes the piece by urging first-semester freshmen “not to accept unthinkingly what your campus administrators are telling you. Their ideological imbalance, coupled with their agenda-setting power, threatens the free and open exchange of ideas, which is precisely what we need to protect in higher education in these politically polarized times.”

One of the signs on Abrams’ door reads “OUR RIGHT TO EXIST IS NOT ‘IDEALOGICAL’ ASSHOLE” [sic] and was signed “A TRANSEXUAL FAG”. The one below it was a to-do list of apologies, which included the Directors of Diversity and Res life, respectively, several minority groups, and “campus (general).” Below the list of demanded apologies is a sign reading “QUIT,” and in smaller text, “go teach somewhere else, you racist asshat (maybe Charlottesville?).” Below that sign is one simply reading “QUIT,” and several pieces of paper urging Abrams to “QUIT” are spread out at the foot of the door.

Note the use of “they” and “their” for a single person in this line:

Bee Kinstle, ‘21, placed a letter of their own outside Abrams’ door. They wrote that, as a bisexual and non-binary student, the discussion of their identity that Abrams seems to call for would make them “feel unsafe on campus.”

Professor Abrams is not an extremist. He has merely pointed out, correctly, that the left dominates academia, despite higher education’s obsession with diversity, and that that damages intellectual diversity.

In 2017, he wrote at National Review:

New England’s Hallowed Halls, Crumbling

It is hard to think about New England without its colleges. Numerous schools in the region predate the founding of the United States, and many towns such as Middlebury are so intimately linked to their local school historically, culturally, and economically that it would be hard to think of New England without its politically progressive, prestigious institutions of higher education.

It is thus understandable that New Englanders may be upset over a new ranking series that places many New England schools at the bottom of a list.

The offending list is the Heterodox Academy’s new ranking of 200 schools created to measure how much viewpoint diversity one can expect to find on a particular campus. The assessment takes into account a number of factors pertaining to free speech and viewpoint diversity — including the Intercollegiate Studies Institute ratings of campus culture and whether or not the school has endorsed the Chicago Principles on free expression.

At a time when the diversity of ideas — and notably conservative thought — is diminishing on college campuses nationwide, this new classification of schools is important.

Abrams has also written in defense of free speech at The American Interest:

Professors Support Free Speech

Controversy about speech and speakers has become de rigueur on our nation’s college campuses. Students are front and center in these debates, and numerous reports and surveys paint an inconsistent picture of their views on free speech. While students claim to value the First Amendment and the inclusion of many conflicting ideas in debates, they also support limits on speech to promote greater diversity and inclusion, or to safeguard particular groups of people.

While student attitudes toward openness are of value, these undergraduates are still developing intellectually and politically. What is notably absent in the current research is an examination of the faculty tasked with teaching these students.

In this 2017 video, Abrams describes what it’s like to be a conservative on a leftist campus. It’s cued to start at the 28:17 mark, just press play:

Legal Insurrection reached out yesterday to the President of Sarah Lawrence, Cristle Collins Judd, for comment on the situation, referencing the Reason article. We also asked:

Finally, do you support Prof. Abram’s right to publish the op-ed in question, and does the college intend on fully protecting his tenured position and academic freedom?

As of this writing, we have received no response.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Nobody fears the truth more than a liar.

#StopColorJudgments #IndividualIntellectualDiversity

#HateLovesAbortion

Update: “Sarah Lawrence Prof Responds ‘Thanks for proving my point, haters.'”

legacyrepublican | November 3, 2018 at 10:25 am

Dare I say it?

Really. You have been warned.

Last warning.

Of course it happened. It’s a self fulfilling PROFecy.

I did warn you.

Decades ago my major prof finally quit the professoriate and started a farrier business. He was happy with the change and still writes in retirement. More than 40 years ago he quit as an “odd man out”, a conservative professor who just wanted to teach.

one of my favorite profs signature remarks, after presenting the topic du jour for the course unit, was: ” ladies and gentlemen, this is today’s topic. now what do YOU think about it? “–always encouraging his students to consider, to weigh, to analyze, to THINK for themselves–never bullying, intimidating,strutting–an educator, a professional in every sense of the word

The parallels are unmistakably there,

From,
https://www.jihadwatch.org/2018/06/germany-antifa-fascists-disrupt-force-cancellation-of-university-event-on-islamization

[While the following remarks pertain to a would-be lecture on islamization of the West, they apply equally to any topic which the bien pensant deem off-limits (the list of such topics seems endless); that to which Abrams is being subject proves Abrams point perfectly]

Yet again we see it. In The Coming of the Third Reich, historian Richard J. Evans explains how, in the early days of National Socialist Germany, Stormtroopers (Brownshirts) “organized campaigns against unwanted professors in the local newspapers [and] staged mass disruptions of their lectures.” To express dissent from Nazi positions became a matter of taking one’s life into one’s hands. The idea of people of opposing viewpoints airing their disagreements in a civil and mutually respectful manner was gone. One was a Nazi, or one was silent (and fearful).

Today’s fascists call themselves “anti-fascists.” Just like the Nazis, they are totalitarian: they are determined not to allow their opponents to murmur the slightest whisper of dissent. Forcibly suppressing the speech of someone with whom one disagrees is a quintessentially fascist act.

These fascists will target you for destruction if you oppose jihad mass murder and Sharia oppression of women and others.

[end]

To sum, “Just like the Nazis, they are totalitarian: they are determined not to allow their opponents to murmur the slightest whisper of dissent.”

    fscarn in reply to pfg. | November 3, 2018 at 11:40 am

    You oughta see the way Stanford as a proxy for the bien pensant generally treated Robert Spencer because he had a different opinion of Islam than said bien pensant.

    https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2017/11/13/speaker-generates-controversy-at-stanford-university

    I’m not an expert on the period, and I have no time to become one. However, I have read of brownshirt activities prior to Hitler’s consolidation of power. I have read very, very, very little about communist activities of that period. I am guessing that this is for the simple reason that leftists do not wish this widely spoken of, therefore it is not. It simply exists in the ether as some vague “we fought the fascists but the fascists won” thing.

    I’m sure the last thing they want to see is people drawing parallels between the brownshirts and whatever “street” stuff the communists were doing back in the day.

      Insufficiently Sensitive in reply to JBourque. | November 6, 2018 at 11:17 am

      parallels between the brownshirts and whatever “street” stuff the communists were doing back in the day.

      In one of his autobiographical works, Arthur Koestler writes up the German ‘street stuff’ he participated in before going heretic from the Communist religion.

He closes the piece by urging first-semester freshmen “not to accept unthinkingly what your campus administrators are telling you. Their ideological imbalance, coupled with their agenda-setting power, threatens the free and open exchange of ideas, which is precisely what we need to protect in higher education in these politically polarized times.”

Its worse than he thinks. The students are clamping an iron collar around their own necks;

“2018 Goodreads Choice Awards

Sign up
My Books
Browse ▾
Community ▾
Join Goodreads
and meet your next favorite book!
Sign Up Now

“In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, not to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is…in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to.” – Theodore Dalrymple

This is why so many people who hate a lot about Trump’s social behavior are so invested in him. He stands between us and the hoards of leftist lunatics.

Some folks have blamed weak administrators for the disruptive leftist antics on campuses by students. “Weak” administrators have never been the problem, and this article only reinforces the truth. The administrators are the motivating force.

    Insufficiently Sensitive in reply to ttl. | November 6, 2018 at 11:22 am

    The administrators are the motivating force.

    They’re frequently paid more than mere professors, as well. That’s serious evidence that those who do the hiring are totally dominated by a ‘leftists uber alles by all means necessary’ groupthink.

I have just started to refer to the antifa as “The Borg” though none of them in PDX look like seven of nine.

The governmental privileges of the school are to have education. If only one side is being promoted, that is called indoctrination.

All such events should be reported to the Non-Profit Office of the IRS. The IRS should cancel the non-profit status of the school.

Internal Revenue Service
Exempt Organizations Determinations
Room 4024
P.O. Box 2508
Cincinnati, OH 45201
Fax: (855) 204-6184

    healthguyfsu in reply to David Behar. | November 4, 2018 at 12:36 am

    Non-profits do have leeway over how they are run and their ideologies. I don’t like this, but otherwise, you could argue that all Christian churches have to teach Atheism, Satanism, and the Qu’ran as well.

    Milhouse in reply to David Behar. | November 4, 2018 at 2:06 am

    There is no requirement that a not-for-profit not be ideological. Nor even that a government institution not be ideological.

Sarah Lawrence supposedly charges over $50,000 a year for tuition, and yet their students cannot express dissent without resorting to obscenities. In fact, obscenities seem all they’re capable of expressing, as there is little argument proposed to counter the prof’s op-ed on free speech. The “woke” students don’t seem well educated at all. It is this kind of story from academia that has caused me to put Hillsdale College in my will, as there has to be some vestige of actual education preserved somewhere in this nation. And it sure isn’t at Sarah Lawrence or other supposedly prestigious schools.

I still love all the “it makes me FEEL unsafe!”. Just because you feel a certain way doesn’t make it reasonable or rational and if it is no reasonable and rational then it is not valid.

There is only one way to deal with these nuts, expel them.

We allowed this to happen…

“”Note the use of “they” and “their” for a single person in this line:

Bee Kinstle, ‘21, placed a letter of their own outside Abrams’ door. They wrote that, as a bisexual and non-binary student, the discussion of their identity that Abrams seems to call for would make them “feel unsafe on campus.”””

Well, it could mean that the “individual”, being bisexual, doesn’t quite know what to use in place of “he” or “she”. Or, it could just be that “it’s” bipolar.

    Geologist in reply to txvet2. | November 3, 2018 at 5:07 pm

    This is very simple:

    Bee Kinstle, ‘21, placed a letter of [its] own outside Abrams’ door. [Kinstle] wrote that, as a bisexual and non-binary student, the discussion of [Kinstle’s] identity that Abrams seems to call for would make [Kinstle] “feel unsafe on campus.”

The reality may be even simpler: Bee Kinstle has its pet mouse in its pocket. For a commoner to use “the royal ‘we’,” then he, she, or it must be plural, hence the mouse in the pocket.

ahad haamoratsim | November 5, 2018 at 1:41 pm

Of course the school won’t support or defend him. It’s not like he wrote something defensible, like claiming that Israel is evil incarnate and American Jews have taken over Washington and the world banking system.

What these administrators fail to understand is that by converting their institutions into public-relations mouthpieces for the far left, they are undermining respect for those same institutions, not only on the part of Americans who do not share that ideology, but also on the part of those that are most insistent in promoting it. People do not respect institutions that always bend to their will—they take them for granted, despise them, use them for other purposes, and finally neglect them. Universities depend upon respect and even deference for what they do in order to continue to receive support from the public: otherwise, as they produce nothing of obvious utility, they will be allowed to decay.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend