Home » Articles » One Surefire Way to Stop Outrageous Student Demands
One Surefire Way to Stop Outrageous Student Demands
By Robert Weissberg
Why have the forces of political correctness triumphed so easily on today's campuses? What kind of world is it when a campus can be in turmoil for a week if a white woman wearing hoop earrings is caught serving tacos at "South of the Border Night" in the school cafeteria? All to be followed by a cowardly administrator offering heartfelt apologies to offended students and promising do even more to promote a fully inclusive campus. Not even Franz Kafka could imagine such madness.
Let me offer a brief explanation of this craziness and with its origins understood, suggest a cure. As we shall see, eliminating this pox is not all that difficult and, best of all, courage is hardly necessary.
I'll begin with two factors facilitating the PC triumph: (1) the cheapening of "doing good" and (2) the inability of administrators to resist the PC onslaught.
Doing Good. The impulse to "do good" is particularly common among the young, so it should be no surprise that millions of college students rally on behalf of what they believe to be a "good cause." What has changed over the last half-century is that the cost of doing "good" has sharply declined. A do-gooder version of Moore's Law– the number of transistors that can be put on a single integrated circuit (now about 7 billion) would double every two years (or 18 months)—now applies to "doing good."
So, for example, a 19th-century do-gooder might volunteer at a soup kitchen, an effort that was personally time-consuming and reflected a limited, locally available charitable options. Merely carrying an "end world hunger" sign hardly counts as "doing good."
Over time, the cost of campaigning to end world hunger has declined dramatically. Now just drop off a box of spaghetti at a supermarket collection point or send a check to the Salvation Army. Still, there is some tangible cost, however modest in this doing good. Even an ambitious humanitarian cannot write more than a few checks or otherwise feed the hungry.
By contrast, contemporary campus-based social justice warriors can be a Dervish on steroids at "saving the world" at minimal cost per cause. All it takes is concocting a list of "good ideas" and announcing it in public. No matter that this make-it-up-as-you-go-along jumble is pure theatrics and the candidates are almost limitless.
Even a middling campus activist might over a semester demand the university divest from companies producing fossil fuels, recruit more students of color, eliminate offensive names from school buildings, require mandatory anti-racism training for all faculty, increasing the penalties for sexual harassment, offer racially segregated "safe space" dormitories, eliminate homophobia and Islamophobia, drop racist sports symbols, or monitor micro-aggressions against stigmatized, marginalized groups.
Moreover, since no central control exists over this menu, options continually expand and cannot be anticipated. This is a far cry from when campus Marxists had to toe the party line. Nor is there any rule that requires demands to be financially or legally possible. Impossible demands may well signify a higher commitment and can be incomprehensible — for example, hiring counselors for those anxious over their "inter-sex" identity.
Campus confrontations are thus totally unlike labor/management negotiations over a handful of tangible disputes. Who knows when the next "hateful" incident will occur and the demands that it will trigger? Administrators may have only hours to react if a black undergraduate is arrested for shoplifting or a gay student is called "a queer" by a townie. No wonder official responses are so generic. Again, this is profoundly different than labor/management disputes where the specific agenda is known in advance.
Appropriation or Appreciation?
The futility of Counter-Arguments. Added to these tsunamis of demands is that nearly all are truly non-negotiable in the sense that even if administrators wanted to surrender, surrender is seldom an actual option. For example, a particularly common demand is sharply increasing faculty diversity, a call that, no doubt, most administrators endorse. Unfortunately, good luck to any administrator who will sit down with demonstrators and try to explain the legal and financial obstacles to this worthy goal, how this campus must compete with hundreds of others in pursuing minority faculty, and similar other reasonable rejoinders. Even agreeing with the protestors—America is hopelessly racist, diversity is essential, everything is the fault of whites, blacks are owed billions in reparations—will scarcely cool the passion of those determined to bring justice. What can any administrator say? Her bargaining position is hopeless.
Ironically, those presenting these wish lists of demands seem to have a childlike belief that today's campus administrators are all-powerful who could surrender "if they really wanted to." For example, if only sufficiently threatened, the school president could force the school's endowment mangers to sell all stocks that invest in tobacco, defense industries or manufacture guns. A dean who explained that deans have no influence over endowment investments would not be believed—just a ruse, a devious way to undermine the pursuit of saving the world.
What is to be done? It should be clear that the triumph of campus PC rests on the administration's mistaken view of what student demands are all about.
Let me now offer a concrete suggestion, one even feasible for spineless administrators. In a nutshell, ending the current PC mania will only come when the costs of "doing good" are dramatically increased. Let students think twice about offering up their non-negotiable nonsense. Here's how.
When social justice warriors arrive with their usual dog's breakfast of airhead ideas, the university apparatchik will immediately hand them "University Form 101, Request for University Intervention to Solve a Pressing Problem." No different than the typical paperwork necessary for, say, creating a new major. Fifteen or so dense pages filled with IRS-like terminology will suffice. Note well, university administrators may be spineless, but when it comes to imposing paperwork, they are world class!
Form 101 will require the names of all those pressuring the university, their personal information, a brief (500 word) statement of objectives, a detailed listing of how the university is uniquely suited to accomplish this worthy cause, the value of this endeavor vis-à-vis already existing university and non-university ameliorative measures, potential sources of public and private funding, a specific project time-table, a history of the past successes (and failures) of comparable measures elsewhere, a legal analysis of the proposed initiative, and time-specific benchmarks necessary to calibrate success. A separate Form 101 will be required for each list item, and if social justice warriors are perplexed by the paperwork, the administration will happily provide workshops to complete the form-filling. Even though this paperwork nightmare is familiar to anyone on campus who has attempted to accomplish any policy change, the research and interviews necessary to complete Form 101 are a valuable learning experience.
If social justice warriors object, they will be told that if their quest is really that important, completing Form 101 is hardly an obstacle and, most importantly, the university is powerless to act unless all forms are properly completed and submitted. Until that time arrives, all demands will be put on hold.
Naturally, submitted forms may be returned with requests for additional information and clarifications. Alas, it takes time—perhaps an entire semester– before anything can happen but the smart money will bet that the passion for saving the world will wilt a day or two after receiving Form 101. The bureaucratic blob wins again. Yes, the demonstrations may linger on, but the administrator can now honestly say, "I absolutely agree that members of the Queer Community feel at risk and alienated from campus life, but until the paperwork arrives, I am powerless to act. Please, pretty please complete Form 101, so we can get busy correcting this historic injustice."
In other words, who needs courageous deans to resist the PC idiots when you can just stop them with mind-dulling paperwork. And, as any academic can attest, university administrators excel at this task.
Robert Weissberg
Robert Weissberg is a professor emeritus of political science at The University of Illinois-Urbana.
35 thoughts on "One Surefire Way to Stop Outrageous Student Demands"
John Little Sr. says:
A motivating factor often overlooked in student protests is the strong presence of a desire to have fun. Now, go figure.
B Sharpe says:
Only problem, most of these SJWs are backed by dumbass professors. They'd make filling out the paperwork an extra credit class project. Then develop a template, and make the paperwork even easier the next time. That's what I'd do, and I only have a Master's degree.
That's OK – the written justifications, and plans, and analyses obviously have to be judged by a committee…
Roscoe Pilsner says:
I am always amazed how college presidents will legitimize a mob and try to deal with it. Why don't they do this…
1. Address the mob, tell them that this is not a good way to hold a conversation about important matters
2. Tell them to elect three representatives (designating one as the lead)
3. And have that person make an appointment to come with the other two and meet with the president at a set time on a set date.
Once they are in the meeting, then you can give them a chance to present their views and hand them the form and explain how it all works. Before they leave (maximum of 45 minute meeting) they are requested to make a follow up appointment for two weeks later.
It is time these administrators acted like adults.
Chris fountain says:
HA! I volunteer at my local soup kitchen 3 days a week, 4-7 hours a day, and am known as "Chris the Trump voter" (good spiritedly, though with some wonder), and haven't met many campus activists on the dish line.
malclave says:
The activists would no doubt say that Form 101 is the worst thing in the world. And Dean (formerly Comrade) O'Brien would laugh.
LKP says:
You're an evil genius!
Hepatia says:
I used this plan in the 90's in our private school. The proposal also had to include a preliminary budget and fundraising plan. I never received a single finalized proposal.
The problem is that when it comes to enforcing politically correct dogma, most administrators are not spineless at all, but true-believer tyrants. Admin. across the country are instituting programs meant to enhance the students' sense of victimhood and then fully weaponizing them — #WeaponizedSensitivity. While I like the tedious form requirement, students would demand an army of admin. assistants to assist them in filling them out, and the bureaucracy would obligingly bloat up even faster. I know the suggestion is tongue-in-cheek, but this mindset has gone beyond parody.
Bob McFee says:
My first reaction was that it would stifle free speech. In this case though, it allows administrators to only delay free speech with regard to their own institution so that they can respond thoughtfully to any proposals. To allow a minority to dictate and override the rest of the university community is unfair in the extreme.
The proposal does not seek to limit free speech in general, but allows the university adults to pursue the objectives they were hired to achieve regardless of political persuasion. However, I don't think that the administrators are surrendering in any form. The are using the students as an excuse for instituting policies they like. I don't see them giving up that excuse.
I would also note, that most, if not all of the protests that occur, especially illegal or violent ones, are of radicals of the left wing. I'm trying to think of conservatives that have had rioting, sit ins etc. I can't. My memory isn't real good, so if somebody has examples, lets hear them.
I agree that having students run the paperwork gauntlet is educational as I learned on an issue that was important to me. I actually completed my gauntlet and got positive results. That may not be the case with the usually poorly thought out demands of the radical left.
In addition to this proposal, I would suggest a list be made of universities that have already capitulated to politically correct demands. This list of universities would then be made available to the public, with the audience being corporations that hire graduates. For those companies that are interested in doing business and making money, they can stop hiring from those universities on the grounds that the university's students aren't adequately prepared for the real world. Students aren't going to want to go to a university whose graduates aren't hired. Existing students will transfer out, causing a great loss of funds to the PC institution. Money talks, I'll not deny. I heard it once, it said goodbye.
Manual Paleologos says:
And when they throw tantrums and occupy campus buildings, disrupt speakers, or block roadways, make the cost of that severe. Drag them out and expel them. The crap will stop.
Mark Treesh says:
Put Lois Lerner in charge of approving the forms.
Cornfed says:
Not bad! Paperwork is roughly equal to dental work, so this might actually work!
Linda Seebach says:
The instructions should also remind applicants that plagiarism is a serious violation of university standards, and their Form 101 will be subjected to forensic plagiarism analysis and rejected if the analysis shows there is statistically significant evidence ( p > .05 ) that one or more of the required justifications is plagiarized.
. . . the difficulty, of course, is that the administration (and the faculty, although they are unlikely to be asked for their consent) approves of the students' outrageous demands and is just using the students as an excuse to implement policies administrators want. They don't want to adopt a Form 101 requirement even though it would increase the number of positions in the university's Diversity bureaucracy.
Robert Sendler says:
I'm with Linda…these administrators aren't spineless, they're accomplices.
They approve of these tactics and weep Crocodile Tears for the object of the students rage…
Sam L. says:
Ingenious!! My congrats!
Michael R Becker says:
Brilliant.
I personally prefer a nice smile and a "No, now go f*** yourself kiddie," but then I suspect I've got more spine than the sum total of all administrators in higher education today and I'm always armed.
Ed Cutting says:
I much prefer asking "why?" — questioning their underlying assumptions.
90% of them are unable to articulate a reason why they believe in the things they do, they just know what they are supposed to believe and hence do.
They really are like lemmings — it's actually kinda sad — and sometimes you can actually get through to them.
JimB says:
I have a better idea. Keep these airheads out of college to begin with, using admission examinations to qualify for college work. This would take care of at least ten percent. Next, quit guaranteeing student loans. This will require that the institution actually provide an education that is worth the investment; no-one would take the risk of lending money to…for example…several hundred students of a discipline with no job appeal.
Bitter Resistance says:
I'm similarly staggered by the sheer brilliance of this idea. What will it take to get it implemented? Could this idea be pushed through by an act of Congress or even a regulation issued by the U.S. Department of Education? Can someone with an inside connection get it to Betsy DeVos?
Mr. Weissberg, please do *not* let this stroke of genius slip quietly into the dustbin of memory. Push it for all it's worth!
and says:
The writer incorrectly thinks he is talking to someone who is able to understand his words
logic AND gives a crap. The "students" in the indoctrination centers they attend only and always think only of what they want just as a newborn baby does because that is the only thing they know.
Francis W. Porretto says:
A genius walks among us! Professor Weissberg, my hat's off to you. This is truly inspired.
Micha Elyi says:
Yeah, but what's Professor Weissberg's plan when George Soros funds an NGO whose mission is to fill out such paperwork for worthy causes?
I gotta admit though, imposing paperwork does match Saul Alinsky's advice to do things your people (in this case, spineless university administrators) like doing.
Jenos Idanian says:
My concern is that this would have the effect of encouraging and empowering the bureaucrats, who are also a tremendous problem. Bureaucratic bloat is one of the biggest driving factors in skyrocketing college costs, and this would only encourage more.
I say simply remind the administrators that part of their job is to maintain good order on their campuses, remind them that they have plenty of powers to enforce that good order, and inform them that their professional future is contingent on them maintaining good order. All they have to do is treat the disruptive students like they treat accused rapists and conservatives in general now.
Michael W. Perry, medical writer says:
Brilliant, absolutely brilliant. I can only add what's suggested by this marvelous scene in the movie Twelve O'Clock High. As important as those student claims are, the paperwork they file must be perfect, no sloppiness permitted.
Pettifogger says:
Oh, but you see, requiring someone to fill out a form is symptomatic of patriarchal and colonialist oppression. At a minimum, the university should fund form filler-outers for kooky schemes that rolls along.
John Paulson says:
"That is an interesting idea. We support your idea but first please fill out Form 101. Hopefully in the future there can be help to fill in the forms. But that can be done with out following the proper provided path. So please properly fill out Form 101"
If you need assistance with filling out form 101, please submit form 102 Application for Form-filler-outer.
John Fembup says:
Protesters wanna change the University environment?
Let 'em fill out environmental impact statements.
That's even good training for what they will face when they graduate into real life.
TeeJaw says:
Lois Lerner should be put in charge of administering this program.
Dave Schuler says:
Wishful thinking, I'm afraid. If the administrators had the courage and/or the inclination to respond as you suggest, there wouldn't be a problem to begin with. How many of today's college administrators actually agree with the demands? These superannuated undergraduates aren't immune to saving the world on the cheap, either.
Diggs says:
Add in a four-figure "filing fee to cover administrative costs."
Between that, and the average SJWs inability to critically think through even one of the written requirements, you've got yourself a sure-fire way to eliminate 99.9% of the moronic demands currently festering at universities.
I disagree. The campus activists will just run to the Student Government and demand that this fee be taken from mandatory student association fees. SJWs win, everybody else loses.
Non-Hexadecimal says:
Brilliant! It's the bureaucratic equivalent of smothering it with a pillow.
"Form 101 will require the names of all those pressuring the university, their personal information, a brief (500 word) statement of objectives, a detailed listing of how the university is uniquely suited to accomplish this worthy cause, the value of this endeavor vis-à-vis already existing university and non-university ameliorative measures, potential sources of public and private funding, a specific project time-table, a history of the past successes (and failures) of comparable measures elsewhere, a legal analysis of the proposed initiative, and time-specific benchmarks necessary to calibrate success."
Sendarius says:
… and since the university receives government funding, on submission, Form 101 becomes a document covered by the Open Records Act..
To save time and money processing FOIA requests, the forms will be published in their entirety on the university web-site, including all personal identifying information.
Please! Support Our Work and DONATE
Minding the Campus, the website written mostly by courageous professors who choose to educate rather than proselytize students to their world view, needs your help. Even a small donation makes a big difference. Click here to donate now.
Western Civilization = White Supremacy
New York City school administrators have been taught that pillars of Western Civilization such as objectivity, individualism, and even belief in the written word all are examples of … white supremacy, the New York Post reports.
A slide presentation obtained by the Post from the workshop "Dismantling Racism: A Workbook for Social Change" includes claims that a belief in an "ultimate truth" (objectivity) leads to a dismissal of "alternate viewpoints or emotions" as "bad" (this is straight out of the critical race theory playbook), and that emphasis on the written word overlooks the "ability to relate to others" and leads to "teaching that there is only 'one right way' to do something."
Other "hallmarks" of white supremacy include a "sense of urgency," "quantity over quality," and "perfectionism." Read more at The College Fix
The Civility Problem
Maybe a few courses on how to create a civil society would help America's so-called "social warriors" learn how to deal with their fellow men and women. Let's start with Amherst College in Massachusetts, where former Attorney General Jeff Sessions was scheduled to address the ongoing issue of free speech on campus. Campus Reform reports that Sessions got a dose of today's SJW tactics when a stinkbomb was set off before he went on stage. Then, a walkout was staged by a gay pride group punctuating the assault on the former A.G. Stinkbombs? What is this, 7th grade?
Studying 'Angry White Males'
The University of Kansas has approved a course called "angry white male studies," open to all students willing to take a women's studies course first. The course on white males will explore recent changes in demographics since the 1950s. Republican Congressman Ron Estes took a dim view, arguing that "KU is offering a class that divides the student population and could pose a TitleIX violation by creating a hostile campus movement based on gender."
The course will be taught by Christopher Forth, who focuses on gender, fat-shaming, and masculinity.
Erasing White Men from Politics
Believing that courses on American political thought are too fixated on white males, Professor Chad Shomura of the University of Colorado at Denver has solved the problem by banning discussion of white men in his course on the nation's political thought. This means nothing from Washington, Jefferson, Tocqueville, Rousseau or any of the pre-Obama presidents. Discussion of the Hillary Clinton race for the presidency in 2016 is allowed, but how she managed to lose while apparently "running unopposed" is unclear.
No Free Speech: Heckler Cancels Another Student Meeting
Last week, a group of at least 4 Portland State University police officers stood by and declined to intervene as a heckler with a cowbell single-handedly canceled a College Republicans meeting. This is the second time in 2019 that PSU allowed hecklers or would-be hecklers to shut down campus expression — and the second time the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) has demanded the university adhere to its First Amendment obligations. FIRE first wrote to the university Feb. 18 after PSU's law enforcement unilaterally canceled a meeting of a socialist student group after the founder of the group Patriot Prayer said he would show up.
Be Careful What You Wish For on Social Programs
Nathan Glazer, the last of a group of famous neocon social scientists, died at the age of 95 on January 19 at his home in Cambridge, Mass. (He resisted the label "neocon.") Glazer consistently warned that vast government plans to improve the lives of the poor often come to grief or create new problems of their own. "The evaluations of the specifics of the first ten years after the launching of (the War on Poverty) confirm that nothing worked and in particular, nothing in education worked." He concluded that the family was the key institution to positive social change and that rights are inherent in individuals, not groups. The article here by Howard Husock of the Manhattan Institute ran in 2011 when President Obama planned an extension of the War on Poverty.
Reader Letter of the Week
In response to "Are Elite Universities Still Open to Jewish Students?"
"American universities are openly breaking their bonds with the Jewish community by embracing active discrimination against Jewish students and rejecting their intellectual, emotional and moral attachments to the values of equal human dignity, universal rights, critical inquiry, and rational thought."
It's actually the other way around — American academia has rejected the values of equal human dignity, universal rights, critical inquiry, and rational thought and hence is embracing active discrimination against those with intellectual, emotional and moral attachments to said values.
It is a replacement of Judeo-Christian values with those of the French Revolution — the group rights of fraternity, liberty, and equity have replaced Locke's individual (God-given) rights of life, liberty, and property. And it's not just Jewish students being discriminated against and harassed, although they may be the most visible victims of it.
And it's not just in the elite universities — it's pandemic in K-12 as well.
Ed Cutting, Amherst, Massachusetts
Write for MTC
Calling all professors, college newspaper reporters and editors who believe in diversity of thought as well as culture and ethnicity. Minding the Campus aims to expose today's single lane thought highway at today's universities and find solutions to the growing monoculture of ideas that silences the contrarians. MTC also has a commitment to due process and reports on how accusations of sexual assault on campus can convict a student who was denied legal representation. If you want to know more, please click here to read more.
Article Archives Select Month July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007
Archive: In the News
Archive: Notable Campus News
Writing for Minding the Campus
Lord of the Flies Comes to Evergreen State AEI, May 13
Teaching Liberals About White Privilege, Big Think, May 13
Harvard Boots Weinstein Lawyer from Dean Post, NY Post, May 12
White People Blamed for Climate Change, Washington Examiner, April 9
Read more "In the News" HERE
Copyright © 2019 Minding the Campus, Inc.