Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
American higher education: Where free speech goes to die
American higher education: Where free speech goes to die
Jan 14, 2026 8:07 AM

You’ve heard of that mythical place where elephants go to die? Apparently, these giants “know” they are going to die, and they head off to a place known only to them.

Free speech in the United States goes off to die as well, but there is no myth surrounding this. Free speech dies in our colleges and universities. Just ask American Enterprise Institute’s Christina Sommers. Sommers is a former philosophy professor and AEI scholar who recently spoke at Oberlin College. Her speech was excellent, but it apparently frightened the pants off a bunch of students (oh, I probably can’t say that. It likely makes someone feel violated.) They paraded outside the room where Sommers spoke, holding signs invoking “trigger warnings” and announcing a “safe room” where those who found Sommers’ talk too much to handle. Her topic? “What’s Right (And Wrong) With Feminism.” She was harassed and harangued both in-person and online for daring to speak such words.

Kirsten Powers, a Fox News contributor, notes that free speech is anything but on our college campuses. She writes at The Daily Beast that even the mere whiff of something that might possibly offend someone somewhere is stamped out before it even leaves a person’s mouth – the very opposite of free speech. Even edian Chris Rock has noticed.

Chris Rock told journalist Frank Rich that he had stopped playing college campuses because of how easily the audiences were offended. Rock said he realized some time around 2006 that “This is not as much fun as it used to be” and noted George Carlin had felt the same way before he died. Rock attributed it to “Kids raised on a culture of ‘We’re not going to keep score in the game because we don’t want anybody to lose.’ Or just ignoring race to a fault. You can’t say ‘the black kid over there.’ No, it’s ‘the guy with the red shoes.’ You can’t even be offensive on your way to being inoffensive.” Sadly, Rock admitted that the climate of hypersensitivity had forced him and edians into self-censorship.

What ends up happening is that people on college and university campuses either don’t say exactly what they mean for fear of reprisal, or they end up doing this weird dance of “I meant to say” and “I didn’t mean to offend” and “Oh, just forget about it. I’ll shut up now.”

In December 2014, the president of Smith College, Kathleen McCartney, sent an email to the student body in the wake of the outcry over two different grand juries failing to indict police officers who killed African-American men. The subject heading read “All Lives Matter” and the email opened with, “As members of the munity we are struggling, and we are hurting.” She wrote, “We raise our voices in protest.” She outlined campus actions that would be taken to “heal those in pain” and to “teach, learn and share what we know” and to “work for equity and justice.”

Shortly thereafter, McCartney sent another email. This one was to apologize for the first. What had she done? She explained she had been informed by students “the phrase/hashtag ‘all lives matter’ has been used by some to draw attention away from the focus on institutional violence against black people.” She quoted two students, one of whom said, “The black students at this school deserve to have their specific struggles and pain recognized, not dissolved into the larger student body.” The Daily Hampshire Gazette reported that a Smith plained that by writing “All Lives Matter,” “It felt like [McCartney] was invalidating the experience of black lives.” Another Smith sophomore told the Gazette, “A lot of my news feed was negative remarks about her as a person.” In her apology email McCartney closed by affirming mitment to “working as a white ally.”

McCartney clearly was trying to support the students and was sympathetic to their concerns and issues. Despite the best of intentions, she caused grievous offense.

As my dad would say, you can’t win for losing.

This is not something to jest about, however. It’s very serious. Colleges, of all places, should be where all ideas get thrown into the mix, hashed out, discussed, debated. Instead, a few people tightly control what passes as dialogue, and everyone else sits with their mouths clamped shut. What was once the essence of the college experience has e a punishable offense. That’s not hyperbole:

At Colorado College, a private liberal arts college, administrators invented a “violence” policy that was used to punish non-violent speech. The consequences of violating a speech code are serious: it can often lead to public shaming, censoring, firings, suspensions, or expulsions, often with no due process.

If someone doesn’t like what you have to say, you can lose your job and reputation, and be opened up to almost unbearable harassment in the social media sphere.

A good college education broadens one’s mind. You hear and discuss things you had not before considered, and learn to debate. In this on-going quest for truth, one learns that while everyone gets to speak their mind, not everyone is right. Once colleges and universities shut down free-flowing discussions of everything from affirmative action to zoology, free speech is dead. Even worse, those students – in a few short years – will take those views of microagression, trigger warnings and safe spaces out into the world with them.

Be careful what you say around them.

Read “How Liberals Ruined College” at The Daily Beast.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Surprise! Evangelical politics isn’t univocal
“Letter on Immigration Deepens Split Among Evangelicals,” trumpets a story from the Washington Post. Ever since evangelicals received such credit in the election and reelection of George W. Bush, the ins and outs of evangelical politics has recieved a greater share of media attention. A great part of this attention has focused on so-called “splits” among evangelicals, as a way to highlight the newly recognized reality that all evangelicals aren’t card-carrying Republicans. So from issues like immigration to global warming,...
Socialism redivivus
Ronald Aronson argues that the political left in America needs to get back to its true socialist roots in order to e a coherent and clear alternative in this article from The Nation, “The Left Needs More Socialism.” He points to contemporary political movements in other countries as models for success of the American left: But Americans need only glance around the world to see that there are alternatives. The vibrant World Social Forums are an example, under way since...
Budziszewski on subsidiarity
Following up on yesterday’s entry about Ronald Aronson’s call for a renewed socialism in American politics, I offer this paragraph from J. Budziszewski’s book, What We Can’t Not Know. Discussing the principle of subsidiarity as first explicitly articulated by Pius XI in the encyclical Quadragesimo Anno, Budziszewski writes, As Pius explained, what pushed the principle of subsidiarity to the forefront was the crisis in civil society brought about by the industrial revolution. For a time it seemed as though the...
The 2006 Texas distinguished scientist wants you dead
Well, maybe not you personally. But in his speech to the Texas Academy of Science in March, University of Texas Professor Eric Pianka did announce his hope that a mutated Ebola virus would wipe out ninety percent of the human population–soon. His motives are, of course, the essence of nobility. We’ve bred like rabbits, you see, and drastic measures are needed to restore the balance. Amateur scientist Forrest Mims broke the story in his column for The Amateur Scientist. (Full...
Catholics on immigration
Jordan’s post below observes the divisions among evangelicals on the hot-button issue of immigration. Its divisiveness—cutting across the usual lines of conservative/liberal and Democrat/Republican—has made the immigration debate an unusual and therefore extraordinarily interesting one. The issue also divides Catholics. Los Angeles Cardinal Roger Mahony has been among the most promising national voices in favor of immigrant rights. But ments have not gone unchallenged among Catholics. Activist Jim Gilchrist denounced Mahony’s views. Kathryn-Jean Lopez at NRO questioned them more delicately....
French ‘security’ and economic reality
As student demonstrations in France mount, the government finds it increasingly difficult to dismantle restrictive labor laws that are directly tied to high unemployment rates. Michael Miller examines the political and cultural factors that are behind the French fear of economic risk taking. Read mentary here. ...
First Things imbroglio
A former editor at First Things, Damon Linker, has written a piece for The New Republic, which attacks, among others, his former boss, Fr. Richard John Neuhaus. Linker claims that Neuhaus is a “theocon,” who wants to merge religious authority and political power. Rick Garnett at Mirror of Justice has all the details, including links to blog discussions and his previous post, criticizing Linker’s argument. I’ve read First Things for years and, in my judgment, the truth lies with Linker’s...
Kierkegaard and Christianity
I ran across some of these tidbits over recent months that I thought worth passing along, and it’s a fitting time to do so at noon, typically the lunch hour. The first two are taken from an article by Martin J. Heinecken, “Kierkegaard as Christian,” Journal of Religion 37, no. 1 (Jan. 1957): 20–30. Heinecken was a professor of systematic theology at the Lutheran Theological Seminary at Philadelphia. He writes of Kierkegaard’s critical project against the state church of Denmark:...
Immigration is a symptom
Large numbers of migrant populations going out of a particular area or nation should be viewed in large part as a signal of something. There are reasons for people to pick up and move, and policy and governing bodies would do well to examine these reasons. When business close facilities and open elsewhere, it is usually because the destination location has a better economic and business-friendly environment. So the natural course of action when examining this phenomena is to ask...
‘Overwhelmed by orphans’
Where will they go? Churches and religious relief organizations are playing a much more active role in U.S. foreign policy. And that has been obvious in recent months in the recovery efforts for the South Asian tsunami and the Pakistan earthquakes. In March, the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life invited Andrew Natsios, who recently left the U.S. Agency for International Development as chief administrator, to talk about his five-year term there. This is a must-read for anyone who...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved