I'm tired of minorities whining. I'm sick of them blaming everyone else for their problems and refusing to take responsibility for themselves.
Well, actually, I'm just sick of one minority group whining and refusing to take responsibility for themselves: conservatives at Duke.
Two weeks ago, The Chronicle published a letter by Justin DeSimone titled, "Conservative Views Oppressed at Duke." For those of you who have never read the Duke Conservative Union publication New Sense, DeSimone's letter serves pretty well as a summary of just about any issue: the liberal administration, faculty, and student body of Duke are conspiring to hold conservatives down. The University, a "locus classicus of censorship" according to New Sense, does not allow conservative views to be expressed and punishes those who would dare voice them, whether student or faculty.
One way this alleged censorship is achieved is by giving bad grades to students who demonstrate conservative views. This is my personal favorite among the complaints of Duke conservatives. Normally, conservatives love to talk about personal accountability. The poor, criminals, the unemployed and other disadvantaged groups in society have no one to blame for their problems but themselves. Not so for the Duke conservative. A bad grade on a paper couldn't possibly be the result of deficiencies in the paper. Rather, the brave conservative is being oppressed by his fascist liberal professor.
In complaining of oppression, the DCU mistakes not being listened to for not being allowed to speak. Everybody on campus knows of the DCU and where they stand. This would not be possible if they were truly oppressed as they like to believe. The oppression argument is undermined greatly by the fact it appears so often in a magazine published by a student organization and freely distributed on campus.
In the two plus years that I've been at Duke, two of the three most prominent national figures that I've seen speak here--Alan Keyes and David Horowitz-- were guests of the DCU. The DCU has the same right as every other organization to lobby and petition the administration. They simply reside on a campus where the majority of students, faculty, and administrators do not share their way of looking at the world--not because the arguments of the DCU have been suppressed, but because they have not been persuasive. Of course, this in an unacceptable conclusion for conservatives. Their moral certitude will only allow that their views have not been accepted because they have not been properly considered.
Another apparent disconnect between the standard view of conservatism and the stances taken by conservatives at Duke regards the sanctity of private institutions. Augusta has the right to exclude women, the Boy Scouts have the right to exclude homosexuals, but, apparently, Duke University does not have the right to dedicate itself to diversity and multiculturalism.
Duke freshman Steve Miller addresses this argument in an article posted on conservative windbag and race-baiter David Horowitz's website frontpagemag.com. Miller argues that while Duke should feel no legal obligation to be politically diverse, it does have a moral obligation. Miller views the "indoctrination" of America's youth by liberal leaning universities as a "moral outrage." His call for academic purity, however, is disingenuous, as earlier statements in the article reveal that his aim is not actually the elimination of liberal indoctrination, but rather the implementation of conservative indoctrination. While condemning the existence of campus organizations that celebrate the cultures of minority groups, Miller calls for the creation of an organization celebrating "the one culture we all hold in common: American culture" (I have a feeling Duke's many international students may be troubled by this statement).
An investigation of the website of Students for Academic Freedom, an organization founded by David Horowitz and of which Miller is founding a chapter here at Duke, reveals similar results. While the organization claims to fight for political diversity, their real interest is not in eliminating political bias but in switching it from liberal to conservative. The teaching of liberal views is roundly condemned while the teaching of conservative views is roundly praised. If the organization is truly committed to "end[ing] the political abuse of the university and to restor[ing] integrity to the academic mission as a disinterested pursuit of knowledge" as it claims rather than furthering a conservative agenda, I hope Mr. Horowitz is hard at work setting up chapters at schools such as Bob Jones University, Liberty College and Grove City College.
I'll admit that conservatives at Duke have many reasons to be unhappy with the way the University is run, but they need start being honest about the terms of the debate. They need to admit that, no matter how badly outnumbered they may be, they are by no means "oppressed." Conservatives also must drop the charade that they are the paragons of academic integrity, opposed to bias in academia generally rather than just the particular liberal bias of Duke and most other American universities.
Duke University does not hide its commitment to the principles of diversity and multiculturalism. Because of these principles, it has a responsibility to allow the fostering of conservative views on campus. The existence of the DCU (and the potential existence of numerous other conservative student groups) shows that it is living up to this responsibility. The University does not, however, have any responsibility to itself promote values contrary to its own. No institution does. Or so any good conservative will tell you.
Anthony Resnick is a Trinity junior. His column appears every third Thursday.
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.