Archive | FIRE RSS feed for this section

Federally Funded Censorship

14 Feb

A different version of this was published at The Federalist this morning.

Donald Trump famously tweeted a question of whether schools that don’t protect free speech on campus should lose federal funding, after flamboyant conservative speaker (and Trump promoter) Milo Yiannapolous was prevented from speaking at UC Berkeley earlier this year.

But generous federal funding of universities – which critics say has fueled tuition hikes and the growth of expensive university plant, property and equipment like palatial conference centers and spa-quality gymnasiums – may also create a more permanent threat to free speech on campus.


Almost three million of the the 13 million undergraduate students in the U.S. could be hearing their fellow students talk about “Bert” this year.

But they won’t be talking about Bert of Bert and Ernie, or any other Bert they’ve met before.


They’ll be talking about “BRTS,” Bias Report Teams, a new collegiate institution now found on about 232 campuses that serve those 3 million students.


A new report on free speech on American campuses was just released by FIRE, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, a report that tabulates and surveys the rise of Bias Response Teams.


While colleges and their surrounding communities have long had mechanisms for addressing ugly hate crimes, BRTs address the subtle slights and micro-aggressions – whether intentional or unintentional – that might make someone feel unsafe.

BRTs are mainly staffed by deans, administrators, and campus staff borrowed from diversity, student life, LGBT, and Equal Opportunity offices. But FIRE reports, 42 percent also include law enforcement personnel, what FIRE called “literal speech police.”

The BRT at Skidmore College in Saratoga Springs, N.Y. deemed the message “Make America Great Again” written on the whiteboards of two female faculty members of color as a “racial attack.” Pro-Trump messages written in chalk at the Emory University in Atlanta and the University of Michigan also prompted school-wide investigations.

BRT officials at the University of Oregon spoke with staff members of the campus newspaper in response to an anonymous complaint alleging a lack of coverage of transgender people.

Mike Jensen, an adjunct professor at the University of Northern Colorado was warned “not to revisit transgender issues in his classroom” after a student complained about If somebody has never been a woman, how can they know they feel like a woman?

“Inviting students to report a broad range of speech to campus authorities casts a chilling pall over free speech rights,” Adam Steinbaugh, senior program officer at FIRE, said in a statement. “Bias response teams solicit reports of a wide range of constitutionally protected speech, including speech about politics and social issues. These sometimes anonymous bias reports can result in interventions by conflict-wary administrators who then provide ‘education,’ often in the form of a verbal reprimand, or even explicit punishment.”


Martin Berger, the Acting Vice Provost for Academic Affairs at the University of California–Santa Cruz told AMI that BRTs are necessary. “For many year bias reports, if they were dealt with at all, were handled haphazardly.  Campuses in recent years have sought to build multi-disciplinary teams capable of handling any incident that arises.”  Berger says there were hundreds of reports last year at UC Santa Cruz, though he doesn’t know exactly how many.


So far, according to Steinbaugh, BRTs are mainly staffed by deans, administrators, law enforcement, and campus staff borrowed from diversity, student life, LGBT, and Equal Opportunity offices.  But just as these bureaucracies once did not have their own separately funded staff and offices, separately funded BRTs may be the next bureaucratic growth to sprout under the rain of federal funding.


Even the University of Chicago, whose Provost famously issued a statement against restrictive campus speech codes in 2016, has a Bias Report Team.


I interviewed Carleton College Professor Jeffrey Snyder for this article, because he’d written for The New Republic last year critical of the chilling effect of BRTs on free speech.  I asked about the irony of the University of Chicago promulgating the “Chicago Statement” while having a BRT, and he agreed but said it was part of a more general problem where administration and faculty are often at cross purposes and have opposed interests – a point I was interested in hearing in part because it raises the question of whether government funding doesn’t tend to expand the administrative bureaucracy and its power relative to that of faculty, and shift the mission of schools away from teaching.  (Curiously Dr. Snyder a day and a half later sent me an email saying I could not use his quotes if I was writing an article for Breitbart.  When I said I was, as I had originally stated, writing a short newsy piece on the FIRE report for my own employer, the American Media Institute Newswire, and then a longer more op ed-ish piece for The Hill or the Daily Caller, and I sent him a rough draft of this article, with his quotes so he could see them, Dr. Snyder decided he did not want to be quoted. Apparently it’s dangerous to be an academic and be quoted in a favorable way by an author who might not be writing for politically correct venues.)


When Dr. Snyder surveyed the existing BRTs only a year ago he found only 100. This year the FIRE report finds over twice as many.  The FIRE report’s author, Adam Steinbaugh, says that though the number of BRT’s is growing, he doubts it doubled in one year, and he suspects Snyder just had a different method of surveying campuses (Steinbaugh surveyed 500).


Off-campus rioters used the occasion of a peaceful protest by students of  Yiannapolous at U.C. Berkeley last week to set fire to university property.  A group of students and faculty at NYU protested another conservative speaker, Gavin McGinness, the next day.  Earlier this week the student government at Santa Clara University banned its local chapter Turning Point USA, a group that advocates “fiscal responsibility, free markets, and limited government,” reportedly claiming that such beliefs and discussions were in themselves racist and made liberal students uncomfortable.


Steinbaugh (and Snyder) points out that though conservative and libertarian groups feature heavily in reports on campus censorship, campus speech codes and institutions like Bias Report Teams can and are being used by almost anyone, including white students who claim they are offended by Black Lives Matter style protests or lecturers claiming policing in America targets blacks, by conservative students claiming they are offended by progressive groups claiming then candidate Donald Trump was racist, and even by progressive and minority students squabbling among themselves.  In a 2015 incident, discussed by FIRE founder Greg Lukianoff in an article he co-wrote for The Atlantic, when a group of Asian students at Brandeis University had an installation on campus attempting to raise awareness about smaller, unintended slights referred to as “micro-aggressions” – things like being questioned about “where did your family come from?” or “what was your first language?” – only to have it shut down by other students claiming that the installation itself was a micro aggression.


According to FIRE, only half of the BRTs surveyed said they believed there was a tension between free speech and combatting bias.  Almost half involved law enforcement officials in their bias reports.


Steinbaugh thinks the impetus behind the growth of BRTs is more bureaucratic than purely ideological, resulting more from campus administrative bureaucrats importing harassment reporting and counseling practices from corporate HR departments than from ideas about taking power from or censoring privileged groups and empowering minorities derived from academics like Herbert Marcuse or Eve Kosofsky Sedgewick.


Trying to find proponents of Bias Report Teams who will discuss them can be difficult.  Two days spent emailing Dr. Archie Ervin, president of the National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education finally resulted in his secretary reporting that he said he was getting ready to go on a trip and could not talk.  Attempts to reach those in charge of Bias Reports at the University of Chicago was similarly difficult.  The number used to make a Bias Report asks the caller to choose from a menu including being connected to the police or to the “Dean on Call,” with the latter option leading to a beeping voice mail box with no greeting or other message.  One University of Chicago dean’s office referred me to an employee in a student affairs office with an LGBT portfolio who is on the University website, but when called turns out to have left the university the year previous.


Dozens of email queries to campus BRT offices around the country and to a variety of civil rights groups produced only one response. to the earlier quoted Martin Berger, Acting Vice Provost for Academic Affairs and Campus Diversity Officer for Faculty.  Berger argues that FIRE is wrong to be concerned that police officers on are on the BRTs: “They seem concerned that 42% of bias teams contain members of law enforcement.  They apparently take this as a sign that police are used to suppress free speech… Campuses in recent years have sought to build multi-disciplinary teams capable of handling any incident that arises.”  But lumping “any incident” reported as “bias” seems to be exactly the problem: having a belief, stating a belief, and other forms of protected speech, are lumped together with violence, threats, intimidation.  In a previous era much of what most people would view as “bias” that should be punished on campus would simply be considered “hazing.”  But punishing “hazing” means punishing actions, not protected speech or beliefs – it is not a tool of re-education to eliminate wrong thoughts. (A few university BRTs – George Washington University, the University of Virginia – do actually also refer to the older concept of “hazing.”)


If President Tump and the GOP decide to reign in federal spending on post-secondary education, especially in the non-STEM subjects, highlighting the institutionalization of censorship on campus may give them plenty of talking points and anecdotes that will resonate with the voters who elected them.

Campus censorship

10 Feb

A different version of this was published last week at American Media Institute Newswire.

Three million of the the 13 million undergraduate students in the U.S. could be hearing their fellow students talk about “Bert” this year.

But they won’t be talking about Bert of Bert and Ernie, or any other Bert they’ve met before.


They’ll be talking about “BRTS,” Bias Report Teams, a new collegiate institution now found on about 232 campuses that serve those 3 million students.

A new report on free speech on American campuses was just released by FIRE, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, a report that tabulates and surveys the rise of Bias Response Teams.

BRTs – composed of students, administrators and law enforcement officials – investigate cases of biased statements, usually made against people because of their membership in a protected class or minority.  Reports can even be made about questions, statements, or other content of classes.

Even the University of Chicago, whose Provost famously issued a statement against restrictive campus speech codes in 2016, has a Bias Report Team.

“It’s telling that on the one hand what is now called the Chicago Statement was written by University of Chicago faculty, while on the other hand the administration has set up a Bias Response Team.  It illustrates a fundamental disconnect between faculty and administration,” says Carleton College professor Jeffrey Snyder, who co-wrote an article on BRTs only a year ago.  “It seems like a paradox, but it reflects a broader divide between faculty and administrators.”  Faculty can also be the subject of bias complaints, including if the content of the lectures is thought to “trigger” students by discussing sensitive topics like rape, race, or a growing list of subjects.  Snyder says he’s not had any personal experience with bias complaints, but he worries about how the institution of bias reporting will stifle research and teaching in the social sciences, including in his work on the history of race and desegregation in education.

When Snyder surveyed the existing BRTs only a year ago he found only 100. This year the FIRE report finds over twice as many.  The FIRE report author, Adam Steinbaugh

Bias and free speech on campus have been in the news this month.  Off-campus rioters used the occasion of a peaceful protest by students of conservative Milo Yiannapolous at U.C. Berkeley last week to set fire to university property.  A group of students and faculty at NYU protested another conservative speaker, Gavin McGinness, the next day.

Snyder points out that though conservative and libertarian groups feature heavily in reports on campus censorship, campus speech codes and institutions like Bias Report Teams can and are being used by almost anyone, including white students who claim they are offended by Black Lives Matter style protests, by conservative students claiming they are offended by progressive groups claiming then candidate Donald Trump was racist, and even by progressive and minority students squabbling among themselves.  He points to a 2015 incident when a group of Asian students at Brandeis University had an installation on campus attempting to raise awareness about smaller, unintended slights referred to as “micro-aggressions” – things like being questioned about “where did your family come from?” or “what was your first language?” – only to have it shut down by other students claiming that the installation itself was a micro aggression.

Critics say they function to censor free speech and shut down discussion, as when one faculty was reported for saying  he didn’t think a male author being discussed could imagine what it was like to be a woman.  Defenders say students, especially minority students, cannot learn in an environment where they do not feel comfortable and respected, and that discrimination and bias prevent them from being able to focus on their studies.


In a survey of almost 500 schools, 232 had Bias Response Teams.  According to FIRE, only half of those surveyed said they believed there was a tension between free speech and combatting bias.  Almost half involved law enforcement officials in their bias reports.

Libertarian calendar for March 2015

25 Mar

March 25
Washington DC

Libertarian Ladies Night Happy Hour
Women Only 6-8
Men Welcome 8-10

Join your favorite libertariettes (post old and new ladies mixer) for a drink! Gentlemen friends, work husbands, significant others, boyfriends, and life partners are all welcome!
****************************************************************************
March 25
Washington DC

Let’s Talk School Choice

6:00 pm – 8:00 pm

1706 New Hampshire Avenue NW
When is the last time you discussed school choice and won $500?Let's Talk Logo Block
How much do you know about school choice? What are effective policy initiatives and viable solutions to providing better proper education choices for Americans? More importantly, howdo you communicate these ideas to your friends and family?
Join communications guru Bob Ewing, The Mercatus Center at George Mason University, and school choice expert Greg Reed, The Institute for Justice, for a crash course of the facts, communication tips, and a chance to practice your argument in a small group setting. Space is limited to 30 participants. A reception will follow the group practice.
This event is free for members, and $10.00 for the general public. Any attendee is eligible
to submit an application to compete for the $500 prize at the competition on July 15, 2015.
Let’s talk school choice.
6:00 pm Registration/ Reception
6:30 pm Lessons & Argument Practice
Reception following
****************************************************************************

March 26
New York, NY

Can We End Poverty?

8:30 a.m. – 12:15 p.m.

Columbia University
Roone Arledge Auditorium
Alfred Lerner Hall, 2920 Broadway

Featuring John Allison, President, Cato Institute; John McWhorter, Center for American Studies, Columbia University; Michael D. Tanner, Senior Fellow, Cato Institute; Ron Haskins, Co-Director, Center on Children and Families, Budgeting for National Priorities Project; Angela Glover Blackwell, Founder and CEO, PolicyLink;Christopher Wimer, Co-Director, Center on Poverty and Social Policy; Robert Doar, Morgridge Fellow in Poverty Studies, American Enterprise Institute; Jo Kwong, Director of Economic Opportunity Programs, Philanthropy Roundtable; Harriet Karr-McDonald, Executive Vice President, Doe Fund; Robert Woodson, Founder and President, Center for Neighborhood Enterprise; David Beito, Professor of American History, University of Alabama; and Ruth Rathblott, President and Chief Executive Office, Harlem Educational Activities Fund.
On January 8, 1964, President Lyndon Johnson delivered a State of the Union address to Congress in which he declared an “unconditional war on poverty in America.” Johnson’s goal was not only to “relieve the symptom of poverty, but to cure it and, above all, to prevent it.” Since then, federal and state governments have spent more than $19 trillion fighting poverty. But what has really been accomplished with all of that funding?
This special half-day conference brings together a wide range of experts from across the political spectrum to discuss whether the War on Poverty succeeded in reducing poverty in the United States, what remains to be done, and whether private charitable efforts would be a better alternative to government welfare programs.
8:00 a.m. – 8:30 a.m. Registration
8:30 a.m. – 8:45 a.m. Welcome Address

John Allison
President, Cato Institute

8:45 a.m. – 9:30 a.m. Keynote AddressJohn McWhorter
Center for American Studies, Columbia University
9:30 a.m. – 10:45 a.m. PANEL 1: 50 Years of the War on Poverty: Success, Failure, Incomplete?Moderator: Ron Haskins
Co-Director, Center on Children and Families and Budgeting for National Priorities Project, Brookings Institution

Michael Tanner
Senior Fellow, Cato Institute

Angela Glover Blackwell
Founder and CEO, PolicyLink

Christopher Wimer
Co-Director, Center on Poverty and Social Policy, School of Social Work, Columbia University

Robert Doar
Morgridge Fellow in Poverty Studies, American Enterprise Institute

10:45 a.m. – 11:00 a.m. Break
11:00 a.m. – 12:15 p.m. PANEL 2: Private Alternatives to Government WelfareModerator: Jo Kwong
Director of Economic Opportunity Programs, Philanthropy Roundtable

Harriet Karr-McDonald
Executive Vice President, Doe Fund

Robert Woodson
Founder and President, Center for Neighborhood Enterprise

David Beito
Professor of American History, University of Alabama

Ruth Rathblott
President and Chief Executive Officer, Harlem Educational Activities Fund

If you can’t make it to Columbia University, watch this event live online at www.cato.org/live and follow @CatoEvents on Twitter to get future event updates, live streams, and videos from the Cato Institute.
****************************************************************************
March 26
Babylon, NY

Suffolk County Libertarian Convention
Lily Flanagan’s Restaurant
345 Deer Park Avenue

file:///Users/msmwizard/Downloads/b24c82d754d5634e2bdd5cb343889fcf_screen.jpg

Tickets in Advance are $20 and at the door $25 which can be paid below.  All monies that are paid will be forwarded to the SCLP.  The price includes a buffet dinner and unlimited soft drinks.  There is a cash bar.
The business portion of the meeting will be free.
Besides electing new officers we will feature four very interesting speakers as follows:

Bob Schulz:  Founder of WethePeople.org
Speaking on the unconstitutionality of Common Core education in New York.
If you want to stop common core, this is a must see event!  Please bring your entire family and friends to help us do our part to stop this blight on our children’s education!

Karin Murphy Caro:  Founder and CEO of Blu Chip Marketing
Speaking on social media and media relations.  In all political races the use of social media is essential.

Lidia Szcezepanski, Esq.:  Founder of the Web TV Show “Everything Lidia” on The Daily Blu
Speaking on “And Liberty and Justice for All…… If you have enough money!”

Robert Schuon: Vice Chair of the Suffolk County Libertarian Party
Speaking on Austrian Economics
So come join us for a night of entertaining speakers and a great meal!

******************************************************************************

March 28
Iowa Libertarian Party convention

*********************************************************************

March 28
Garner, NC
6:00 PM
Carolina Barbecue N Chicken
733 Us Highway 70 W
Garner, NC
************************************************************************
March 29
Culver City, CA

  • Time: 6:00pm Pacific
  • Location: Reason Magazine LA Office, 5737 Mesmer Avenue
We will be joined by David Nott, the President of Reason Foundation to answer important questions from AFL’ers ranging from policy to career.
About AFL: As the student movement for liberty continues to grow around the world it becomes increasingly important for alumni to stay connected to the students and each other. Alumni For Liberty provides a means for alumni of the student movement to do just that while giving back and empowering the next generation of leaders of liberty.
Did you miss going to ISFLC? Want to rekindle that fire of liberty inside you? Connect with former SFLers and friends to find out the latest happenings in the liberty community.
Please join us for some drinks, swag, and conversation! Speaker: David Nott is president of Reason Foundation, a nonprofit organization dedicated to advancing free minds and free markets. Under Nott’s leadership, Reason’s public policy experts have advised President George W. Bush, California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, and numerous other officials on how to shrink the burden of government. Reason, a monthly magazine of political and cultural commentary, was named one of the “50 Best Magazines” two straight years by the Chicago Tribune and is described as “a kick-ass, no-holds-barred political magazine” by the New York Post.
Nott’s professional experience includes six years as president of the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, where he is credited with developing and implementing a business plan that led to a 250 percent increase in revenue. Nott also spearheaded the construction of Mercatus’ new Capitol Hill Campus.
Find out more about the Reason Foundation

************************************************************************

March 31
Arlington VA
THE FUTURE OF INNOVATION: A CONVERSATION BETWEEN TYLER COWEN AND PETER THIEL
  • Time:
    2:00pm

    3:30pm
  • Location:
    Founders Hall Auditorium
    Arlington Campus at George Mason University
    3351 N Fairfax Drive
********************************************************************
March 26
Atlanta, GA

Georgia Justice Reform

Facebook Twitter

From State in Crisis to Reform Leader: How Georgia’s Approach to Criminal Justice Is Impacting Well-Being
Time: 6:30 p.m.
Where: Georgia Pacific, Auditorium (located on the lobby level of GP), 133 Peachtree St. NE, Atlanta, GA 30303
Click Here to RSVP
Like many states, Georgia recently found itself in the midst of a criminal justice crisis. In only two decades, its prison population had doubled, diminishing opportunity and well-being for non-violent offenders caught up in the system. Meanwhile, its incarceration budget had also doubled. The Peach State was facing a breaking point.

But thanks to a new approach, leaders in Atlanta have been able to focus resources on rehabilitating non-violent offenders while also ensuring that public safety is not compromised. This move has also helped save taxpayers more than $20 million.

What has Georgia done that has worked and what needs further examination? How has reform affected opportunity and well-being, especially for former prisoners? And can Georgia’s reforms be replicated in other states – or even at the federal level?

Please join the Charles Koch Institute for an upcoming conversation with esteemed criminal justice experts who will explore these questions and more.

OPENING REMARKS
Hon. Jay Neal, Governor’s Office of Transition, Support and Reentry

SPEAKERS
Marissa McCall Dodson, Policy Director and Attorney, Georgia Justice Project
Randy Hicks, President and CEO, Georgia Center for Opportunity
Marc Levin, Policy Director, Right on Crime; Director, Center for Effective Justice at the Texas Public Policy Foundation
Kelly McCutchen, President and CEO, Georgia Public Policy Foundation

Space is limited, so please RSVP as soon as possible.

Join the conversation on #justicereform

**********************************************************************

March 27

Washington DC

2015 Mid-Atlantic Regional Conference

  • Location: Washington, DC American University
  • Dates: March 27, 2015 – March 29, 2015
  • Cost (current students): $5 in advance, $10 at the door
  • Cost (SSDP alumni): $15 in advance, $25 at the door
  • Cost (regular): $25 in advance, $35 at the door

Schedule

TBA – check back often, more information coming soon!

Speakers

TBA – check back often, more information coming soon!

Registration

We don’t want the cost to be a barrier for any students who want to attend. If you cannot afford the $5 ticket, please contact drew@ssdp.org to discuss discount options.ballot drive
*****************************************************************************
March 31
Arlington VA


THE FUTURE OF INNOVATION: A CONVERSATION BETWEEN TYLER COWEN AND PETER THIEL
  • Time:
    2:00pm

    3:30pm
  • Location:
    Founders Hall Auditorium
    Arlington Campus at George Mason University
    3351 N Fairfax Drive,
This is the inaugural event of the Mercatus Center’s newly established Conversations with Tyler event series.
PARTICIPANTS:
Tyler Cowen, Holbert L. Harris Chair of Economics, George Mason University
Peter Thiel, cofounder of PayPal and Palantir Technologies, partner at Founders Fund
Peter Thiel and Tyler Cowen, both New York Times bestselling authors, are among today’s top global thought leaders and influential innovators. Join us as these two engage in a serious dialogue on the ideas and policies that will shape the future of innovation and progress in the coming years and decades.
Peter Thiel is among the most impressive innovators of the past two decades. As co-founder of Paypal and seed-funder for Facebook, Thiel has been instrumental in the conception and growth of some of today’s most entrepreneurial and innovative companies. In his latest best-selling book, Zero to One, Thiel explains how to build a better future by capitalizing on innovation. A staunch optimist, he maintains that progress can be achieved anywhere the human mind is able to think creatively. Thiel describes how entrepreneurial thinking leads to innovation, which builds something new and moves the mark from zero to one.
If you have any questions about this event, please contact Bethany Stalter at bstalter@mercatus.gmu.edu or (703) 993-4889.

About Peter Thiel
Peter Thiel is a legendary entrepreneur and venture capitalist. He has played a vital role in some of the most dynamic companies to emerge from Silicon Valley. His contributions to technology, entrepreneurship, and finance are recognized around the world, including by the World Economic Forum, which honored Thiel as a Young Global Leader, and by BusinessWeek, which named him one of the 25 most influential people on the web. Thiel also serves as a primary supporter of the Committee to Protect Journalists, a group that promotes press freedom worldwide; the Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence, which seeks to foster the responsible development of advanced computing technologies; and the SENS Foundation, a medical charity dedicated to extending healthy human lifespans. Thiel received a BA in Philosophy from Stanford University and a JD from Stanford Law School.

About Tyler Cowen
Cowen is a world-renowned professor of economics, co-author of the popular economics blog Marginal Revolution, co-founder of the award-winning online educational platform Marginal Revolution University, and chairman of the Board at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University. Bloomberg Businessweek profiled Cowen as “America’s Hottest Economist,” Foreign Policy named Cowen as one of the “Top 100 Global Thinkers,” and an Economist survey counted Cowen as one of the most influential economists of the last decade.