With support from the University of Richmond

History News Network

History News Network puts current events into historical perspective. Subscribe to our newsletter for new perspectives on the ways history continues to resonate in the present. Explore our archive of thousands of original op-eds and curated stories from around the web. Join us to learn more about the past, now.

The Academic Bill of Rights: Not Exactly McCarthyism

One of the most obvious facts of life is that America's colleges and universities are dominated by the Left. This is easily documented by the examination of campus catalogues, lists of speakers invited to campus, studies on faculty political affiliations, positions taken by faculty governments, and by book lists. Some liberals even admit the bias on campus, arguing that there is a sort of necessary correlation between reason, justice, and leftist political, social, and moral positions.

What is less understood, at least by the general public, is the intolerance that haunts American campuses as the result of the partisanship, especially in the social sciences and humanities. While more research is needed on this topic, examples abound of the persecution of conservative professors and students, the confiscation and destruction of conservative literature, and the harassment of the few conservative speakers invited to campus. It is widely known that in many disciplines, such as history and literature, conservatives are rarely hired or granted tenure.

Why most faculty in the social sciences and humanities are on the Left is a fascinating topic that can't be dealt with here. But it is sufficient to say that liberals virtually own higher education in America. Now preferring to call themselves "progressives" and "moderates," thousands of zealous faculty members see themselves on a mission to liberate the country from ignorance, fanaticism, and oppression. They see conservatives (especially the Christian variety) as the enemies of all that is good. Which means that the Right has no place in academia, at least outside the schools of business and engineering.

Activist David Horowitz, once on the Left and now on the Right, has recently upset the cozy consensus on campus by writing and defending what he calls the "Academic Bill of Rights." It should not be very controversial, for it is an endorsement of the venerable concept of academic freedom in America, for both faculty and students. It is a document that seeks to secure intellectual independence on campus by opposing ideological or religious tests for faculty hiring and promotion, calls for balanced courses and reading lists in the humanities and social sciences, advocates free speech on campus, and seeks the restoration of research free of ideological restrictions. (Have you read, say, the Journal of American History in the last two decades?)

The Academic Bill of Rights might be adopted by the governing board of a college or university or perhaps even by a state legislature, concerned with the quality of public higher education. It is a statement of principles, designed to reopen the university to diversity at its highest level: A diversity of ideas. As Colorado State Senator John Andrews put it recently, "…political pluralism, open debate, and tolerance of all viewpoints aren't the property of any party. They are simply the American way."

Quite naturally, the Left opposes anything which threatens its hegemony. The reaction of late has reached hysterical proportions, with charges of McCarthyism (the most overused and badly understood term in our political lexicon) and Nazism being hurled at Horowitz. It is said that he is trying to create quotas for the employment of Republican faculty members (this from the people who champion quotas and goals on the basis of skin color), that he would infuse science courses with superstition, and that he sanctions "mind police" to strip the faculty of its convictions. Horowitz has issued effective denials. As to quotas, for example, he replies, "I hold that quotas at our universities are never justified for any reason. Discrimination is always wrong, no matter whether it's based on race, religion, or political belief." The Bill of Rights would actually bar campuses from setting out to hire more conservatives. Academic merit would be the sole consideration.

It's about time for governing boards and state legislatures to begin pondering the value of the ideological straightjacket limiting our college and university campuses to a single point of view. Even if the Academic Bill of Rights is only a statement of principle, without any enforcement mechanism, it will have established a mission statement worthy of a free people in a free country.

Read the document for yourself. The preamble reflects a century of statements by the American Association of University Professors--forgotten in recent decades. David Horowitz, it seems to me, is merely reminding us of the values of intellectual freedom. If that seems subversive to the politically correct, the case made by Horowitz is all that much stronger.

Related Links

Jonathan Rees, "The Conservatives' Misguided Plan to Force Balance in Colorado's College Classrooms."


This article was first published by the National Association of Scholars and is reprinted with permission.