EDITORIAL A defense that civilization can do without
It is difficult to tell exactly what
Lynne V. Cheney, Sen. Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn., and others who constitute the
American Council of Trustees and Alumni are trying to accomplish with their
project, Defending Civilization: How Our Universities Are Failing America
and What Can Be Done About It. The title is as overblown as the sentiment
that drives the effort: No one should ask questions of the American war
effort.
In the wake of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, Americans
across the country responded with anger, patriotism and support of military
intervention. The polls have been nearly unanimous -- 92 percent in favor of
military force even if casualties occur -- and citizens have rallied behind the
president wholeheartedly, begins a report by the staff of the
organization, which claims it is dedicated to academic freedom, quality
and accountability.
Not so in academe, the report continues, saying that
while students waved American flags, professors sponsored teach-ins that
typically ranged from moral equivocation to explicit condemnations of
America.
The report goes on to list 115 examples, mostly quotes, that the
report implies undermine Americas interests and the greater cause of
Western civilization.
A few of the quotes are intemperate, some are tired leftist cant
from another era and some might even be viewed as absurd. But those, in sum,
would have made a rather thin report. By far, most of the examples are
thoughtful, if provocative, statements about the deeper causes of the Sept. 11
horror and about violence or raise difficult questions about U.S. foreign
policy and whether war is the best response.
So, for instance, the report quotes a student from the University
of Oklahoma: Intolerance breeds hate, hate breeds violence and violence
breeds death, destruction and heartache.
Certainly a subversive thought.
Or this Brown University student: I consider myself a
patriot. I think this country does wonderful things for its citizens, but we
must acknowledge the terrible things it often does to the citizens of other
countries.
The report makes a strong case for more study of American history
and Western culture. No argument with that. The suspicion, however, is that the
American Council of Trustees and Alumni would not want our college and
university students tainted with the kind of history that would lead to
students acknowledging the terrible things the United States does
to other countries.
What you have to look at is the underlying reasons,
another Ivy League student is quoted. Poverty breeds
resentment, and resentment breeds anger.
That quote is immediately preceded by a report of a sign at the
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill that read, An eye for an eye
makes the world blind. Presumably those history courses the American
Council of Trustees and Alumni advocates would not include a semester on
Gandhi. But then, of course, he might not make it into a study of Western
civilization except by way of his association with the British.
There is no need to go on. The absurdity of this exercise is
clear. The full text of the report is available at www.goacta.org
It would be absurd, indeed, if this report were not
indicative of a dangerous fervor stalking the country, a fervor intolerant of
questions and dependent on ignorance of recent history. If something
doesnt move us to ask serious questions about our role not only in the
Middle East and Central Asia, but throughout the world, we can bomb Afghanistan
to dust, kill Osama bin Laden and every al-Qaida member and we still wont
get at the heart of the problem.
Those behind this report may have some legitimate arguments with
the world of academe. However, they make a very weak case in the report. Citing
survey numbers and arguing that professors should get in step with the
prevailing public mood contradicts the purpose of free academic discourse. This
is a thinly disguised bit of bullying.
National Catholic Reporter, December 14,
2001
|