With deep regret, I am detaching fully from The University
of Chicago.
The University of Chicago has meant a great deal to me throughout my
life. I fell in love with the university
from the beginning—its magnificent gothic architecture, its synthesis with the
city, its intellectual vibrancy, and its connection with my family history (one
of my grandfather’s first jobs as an immigrant was as a busboy at the Shoreland
Hotel). I have so many wonderful
memories of strolling through the Quadrangles, studying in Harper Library, having a beer at Woodlawn Tap, where the
fellow sitting at the barstool next to you might be reading Ulysses. I had some incredible professors—Frank Kinahan
and Joe Williams, William H. McNeill and Daniel Pipes, Donald Fiske, and Robert
Streeter. I was married in Bond
Chapel. In 2010 and 2013, I helped organize
reunions of our football teams from the late 70’s on campus. Last year, this group raised a memorial fund
for Daniel Tepke, one of the coaches and former administrators of the school.
I have made it a habit to return
to Hyde Park for Reunion Weekend almost every year to renew my connection with
the university, renew old friendships and make new and interesting ones. A few years ago, I attended a wine and
cheese event during Reunion Weekend and chatted with a young woman that was
just graduating and planned to do graduate work in Poland the following year. She confided to me, “This is the first place where
I felt like I fit in. I am terribly
afraid that I will never find another place with so many people like me.” I smiled and responded, “Well, I have some
bad news for you. You won’t. But you can always come back and visit.” I have had similar conversations over the
years with graduating students.
The skies have darkened over Hyde
Park recently, and not just because of
pandemic. Since the university unveiled
the Chicago Principles, the university has conceded a great deal of ground to
Critical Race Theory (CRT) proponents. Recently,
one of the architects of the Chicago Principles, Geoffrey Stone, caved to
demands that he stop using the “N” word in class, because a student found it
offensive. Although he used it only as an illustration in
his First Amendment class, Stone conceded and agreed to cease. While the usage of that word is hard to defend,
Stone’s concession was notable. It silenced
the mob for a bit, but it was the first small chink in the armor. CRT never stops with initial, small victories.
Then there were the mob attacks
on Harald Uhlig and Dorian Abbot. The
university responded to Uhlig’s case by vowing to review all of his social
media posts for hints of “racist content.” It found none. Abbot had the temerity to suggest that the
university look to talent in admissions and appointments rather than race. And the mob promptly descended on him. In Abbot’s case, the university did affirm
its free speech principles, in a communique but in the same message also
affirmed its commitment to its diversity, equity, and inclusiveness (DEI) policy. The fact that students and faculty attempted
to “cancel” both Uhlig and Abbot for espousing eminently defensible positions
tells us that the Chicago Principles and DEI will be in conflict over the long
run—and DEI now has the upper hand.
Last summer, the English Department announced
something of a de facto “no whites” admissions policy, stating that it would
only admit graduate students that are interested in Black Studies for the
coming year. This decision made national
news. Not just some of the spots were
reserved for Black Studies students--- but ALL of them. With some twisted logic, the English
Department sought to fight purported systemic racism with… systemic
racism. So much for Dickens, Hemingway,
and Jane Austen.
All of these events are direct
outgrowths of Critical Theory and its inherent aggressive activism that has
begun to tighten its grip on the institution.
Now we learn that the university is seriously contemplating an entire
department devoted to CRT.
I will make some predictions
about the direction of the university if it continues down this path. Having already taken over an entire formerly
esteemed department (the Department of English), and graced with its own entire
department, CRT will begin to consume the entire university, and all of its
disciplines. As an inherently activist
movement, it will elbow its way in to become the self-appointed overseer of
permissible publications and faculty and staff appointments. It will scour publications and university
communications for any hint of racism. The kinds of attacks suffered by professors
Uhlig and Abbot will become commonplace, and faculty will begin to fear having
a label attached to them by this department.
The calls for decolonializing reading lists and required reading will
become irresistible. The heralded machine of the economics
department that produced so many Nobel Laureates will grind to a halt with the
sand of CRT in its gears. The department
will never again produce another Robert Fogel.
Reading lists that formerly featured the Iliad, Max Weber, Alexis de
Toqueville and Adam Smith will inevitably give way to the work of the likes of Ibram
X. Kendi, Nikole Hannah-Jones and Robin DiAngelo.
I also predict that within 3-5
years, the university will establish a committee to review the Chicago Principles
for “appropriate and necessary adjustments” as a result of a push by the
Critical Race Theory Department. The
result will be less freedom of speech, a lower level of intellectual rigor and
an adherence to a doctrine that seeks to impose its framework on all other
disciplines. Its anti-Enlightenment approach
will be felt across the university (the Booth School of Business is already
sponsoring workshops on “white privilege”).
None of this will happen
overnight---the university has some great momentum---but so does CRT, and we’ve
already seen it exert a powerful influence over the school and it is gaining
velocity. Elevating its status by
granting it an entire department will forever change the character of the
university.
Much is made by CRT proponents of
“inclusiveness.” That word began to
creep into university messages in a letter to incoming students by president
Zimmer a couple of years ago. On its
face, the word is benign, welcoming, and
warm sounding. In practice, however, CRT
assigns a very different meaning in corporate and academic environments. Like the fellow that was able to force
Professor Stone to adjust, “inclusiveness” shifts power. By claiming certain speech makes them feel
“unsafe,” it enables individuals to shut off speech they don’t like, that makes
them uncomfortable, and less included. Exposure
to ideas that make one uncomfortable or “unsafe” is one of the reasons people
flock to The University of Chicago.
The University of Chicago is not,
and should not be, inclusive, but rather EXCLUSIVE—not by skin color, gender, sexual
preference, origin, religion or any of those dimensions, but by intellectual
capability, passion and desire to engage in free inquiry and free thought. The university necessarily can and should
EXCLUDE individuals that are not dead serious about scholarship and
intellectual development, and those that are timid about having their intellect
challenged.
I would probably actually be less
troubled if the university sought to establish
a Department of Astrology rather than one devoted to CRT. A study by The Pew
Research Center showed that approximately 25% of Americans believe in astrology
and I would not be surprised if a
similar percentage of people also believed in CRT. There is about as much empirical evidence to
support Astrology as an academic discipline as there is in support of CRT. And unlike a CRT Department, an Astrology Department would
not make demands on other departments.
An Astrology Department could then legitimately claim that “the fault
lies not in ourselves but in our stars.”
It is ironic that the university
that gave me sufficient critical thinking skills to understand the toxicity of
Critical Theory is now drinking its poison in large gulps. It is corrosive to
the university and to society writ large. Consequently,
I have to detach. I won’t be coming
around anymore. I’ve unsubscribed to
mailings. I won’t be attending reunions
even when pandemic clears. I just can’t
bear to watch the inevitable decline that will inevitably follow the
university’s embrace of CRT as an academic discipline while the ideology simultaneously
undermines the university’s foundations. It is like watching a parent destroy themselves with alcoholism.
I had high hopes that, unlike
other universities, The University of
Chicago would remain a bulwark against Wokeism and CRT. But the institution that has been a source of
great pride for me is now well on the way to “just the place I went to school.”