When I was growing up, my parents had a friend — let’s call him Peter — whose son hung himself from the barn rafters. Years later, once I’d had children of my own and Peter’s son’s death had scarred over into some sort of tolerable pain, he offered me some unsolicited advice on how to raise my own kids. He said “Little kids, little problems. Big kids, big problems.” I’ve never forgotten it. The message was clear: get them young. Train them during their formative years to deal with adversity, because it’s notgoing to get any easier the older they get.
And that’s how I know The Washington Post Editorial Board is wrong here. They think a bunch of freshly baked little commies can be reasoned with, but by the time they’re graduating from college, it’s waaaaay too late for most of them.
From their recent editorial “Cracking down on graduation speeches won’t solve the problem on campus”:
…New York University’s [made the] decision to end live speeches at some of its graduation ceremonies this spring. The understandable goal is to prevent a repeat of what happened last May when a graduating NYU student went off script to decry ‘genocide’ in Gaza, overshadowing a special ceremony for many families. Now, a university dean has told a graduating senior in the education school that her speech will be ‘professionally recorded’ to ensure she sticks to a preapproved script.
The Editorial Board decries pre-recording the speeches as a “lazy” way to handle the problem of recalcitrant children, but that is what these 20-somethings are, and I don’t say that because I’m old and ancient (at 60). I say it because it’s true. The Board seems to think they can be reasoned with or made to be reasoned with. And how do they think this magical human can be made? Evidently by waiting until they are 18 and then having college faculty teach them to debate.
I suppose anything is theoretically possible, if you did catch them as freshman — maybe (and I’m being extremely optimistic here) — but with a monolithically progressive faculty? That strikes me as pure fantasy.
Progressives simply aren’t built for honest, substantive debate. It’s just not in their constitution.
It’s an old adage that one cannot be reasoned out of something one has not been reasoned into and that most assuredly applies here. There’s no reason to progressive thinking because it’s not thinking they float on. It’s a sea of emotion, a vast swell of affirmation which began the day these kids were born and got codified every day of their lives through “gentle” parenting, social promotion, participation trophies, and progressive faculty from K-12. Many have never known the sting of losing… anything. Ever.
They have felt secure in everything they’ve ever thought as (imagine Obama’s voice here) “the right thing to do.” And why not? It’s what Obama himself said whenever he was caught violating the law or the Constitution. And it was enough for the press corps which therefore made it enough for the young “hope and changers” watching.
Back in our day, “if it felt good do it” was more about our own private recreational behavior. Under Obama it became executive orders, the law, and every civilization-destroying behavior imaginable, just a small sample of which translated into shouting down speakers and ruining graduation speeches with unfounded accusations of “genocide.”
There are good times, places and manners for debating Middle Eastern politics. A graduation ceremony is not one of them.
Academic freedom is an important value, but too many elite college campuses became crucibles of conformity in recent years. People with unpopular ideas too often got shouted down or even canceled. Criticizing Israel became a shibboleth.
The solution is not to shut down live speeches. It’s to teach kids that using a graduation ceremony to scream and yell about their personal political views is a stupid and ineffective way to make the world a better place.
And who, exactly, is going to “teach” them this, Washington Post? If they haven’t learned that shouting down speakers isn’t civil behavior by the time they’ve graduated high school, then guess what? The monolithically progressive college faculty isn’t going to teach them. Hell, they’ll be out there shouting with them! We’ve seen examples of exactly this at Columbia. (And other schools.) And that’s the problem. They arrive with young skulls full of mush (to borrow for the late Rush Limbaugh) and their professors just bake them firm.
Unless there’s a wholesale cultural change, I don’t see how this solution of pre-recording speeches doesn’t become the solution to rogue valedictorians, and more’s the pity. Because our kids deserve better. The Post concludes:
A good first step is to crack down on hecklers’ vetoes. Last year the law school tried to cancel an event with conservative lawyer Ilya Shapiro scheduled for the anniversary of the Oct. 7, 2023 terror attacks, citing safety concerns. That event was reinstated amid backlash to the backlash.
The best way forward is to allow the airing of good and bad ideas, and let the best triumph.
The “airing of good and bad ideas” needed to start at the family dinner table. So, sorry Washington Post Editorial Board, by the time they’re 18, it’s too late for most of them. That doesn’t mean colleges shouldn’t try, but just dipping one’s toes ever-so-gently in conservative waters is extremely dangerous to one’s livelihood, so I don’t see a lot of faculty signing up to be first, should they even be constitutionally capable, which I seriously doubt.