We have written about increasing intolerance for conservative and opposing views at our university. Many faculty members fear that if they challenge liberal orthodoxy in their schools, they will be rejected, investigated, or fired. For many, this fear this month in Princeton, where the University of a A complaint previously filed against Professor Joshua Katz, a classical professor Following his ouster, Katz angered professors and students by questioning a proposed anti-racism program that benefits minority professors. Princeton President Christopher Eisgrober called on the university’s board to fire Katz, a move that was seen as a clear attempt to circumvent freedom of expression and advocate for academic freedom over his previous public stance.
In fact, many of the ideas in the letter are the ones I support. It makes sense that “[g]The summer transfer allowance for new assistant professors will be “and” on July 1 [admissions] Transactions are transparent, easy to use, and well-publicized. “agree on[ing] The greater importance of serving as part of the annual salary review “and”[i]Unload[ing] The transparent annual report of demographic data on employment, promotion, tenure, and retention seems irrefutable. And I am happy to join the push for a “significant expansion” of the Mellon desk scholarship program, which encourages underrepresented minorities to enter doctoral programs and strive to become professors.
However, as a 25-year-old faculty member, he objected to receiving a special “summer course and salary discount” for the College of Paints and an additional semester off. He criticized the “extra benefits for no reason other than … pigment”. The article is straightforward and many professors have probably been offended by this criticism. The point of the university’s role is that in practice it calls these protests crude racism. He also objected to the editing of his comments to remove cross-evident evidence of his motive or intent.
In this article, Katz condemned the university’s request for a formal public apology to members of the Black Justice League student group:
The Black Justice League, which operated on campus from 2014 to 2016, was a small local terrorist organization that made life miserable for many (including many black students) who did not agree with the demands of its members.
The letter described the requests as an attempt to balance racial differences among school staff.
“It crosses my mind that anyone should give extra benefits to people – the superpowers right now, let me mention: Princeton Masters – for no reason other than their pigments,” Katz wrote. Reply to letter.
Many called for Katz to be fired for expressing such views. He then introduced Katz University in a compulsory freshman course video Which included “race and freedom of expression.” the part Where he is convicted of racism.
However, it seems that the university is not over with Katz. According to Wall Street JournalThe university reopened a previously alleged sexual misconduct claim and then used it as a basis for terminating it.
Following the controversy over Katz’s criticism of anti-racism, the school newspaper decided to focus on the previous controversy and seek new charges. The university agreed.
Katz had previously been tried in 2006 for allegedly having an intimate relationship with a student. The relationship began when the student was young and reportedly continued after graduation. The student refused to cooperate with the university in his research.
The 2018 investigation concluded that Katz violated the school’s policy of banning sex between teachers as well as its kinship policy. He was then sentenced to one year in prison without pay.
Previous judgments and punishments should have closed this question. This is the academic equivalent of the double risk clause in the Fifth Amendment, which states that “no one should. . . Is subject to the same crime that endangers the life or organs of the body twice. . . . ”
However, at the urging of the students, the university resumed its investigation and found two violations of school policies. Katz claimed that (1) misled investigators and failed to cooperate with the investigation, and (2) dissuaded the former student from seeking psychiatric help when threatened with self-harm.
That was enough to allow Isgrober to seek ousting him, while claiming that this was not in line with his academic views on anti-racism. However, this message could not be clearer to the opposing voices in college: If you speak. Any complaints or problems in the past can be investigated to end you.
According to Edward Yingling, one of the founders of Princeton for freedom of expression
“With Professor Katz fired, Princeton will send a message. If a faculty member or student says something that goes against our custom, we will get you – if not because of what you said, then by distorting your language, using the vast resources of the university to embarrass you. Student body and with research and investigation. “Your personal life over the years.”
I have no explanation for Dr. Katz in the previous dispute. In fact, there is little information about the basic facts of the previous case. It is enough that he has already been tried and punished for his behavior. That sentence can be accepted and the subsequent retrial can be challenged.
The cooling effect will be icy on faculty members. This is a warning that even closed cases can be reopened if the majority disobeys to facilitate your termination.