Jim Geraghty transcribes a portion of a speech by Newt Gingrich in which he commented on the Ward Churchill situation.
Said Gingrich:
Ward Churchill is a viciously anti-American demagogue. He has every right to free speech, and I support his free speech… We should give him free speech by not paying him.[…]
We ought to say to campuses, it’s over…We should say to state legislatures, why are you making us pay for this? Boards of regents are artificial constructs of state law. Tenure is an artificial social construct. Tenure did not exist before the twentieth century, and we had free speech before then. You could introduce a bill that says, proof that you’re anti-American is grounds for dismissal.
Geraghty notes:
I think Ward Churchill could accidentally and single-handedly launch a movement to end tenure at publicly-funded universities.
Perhaps so–especially given the attention that Churchill has received on cable news programs, talk radio and blogs. There already exists a great deal of resentment towards universities in the public, and Churchill has become the poster child for that resentment. Still, I find it ulikely that there will actually be a major movement to utterly do away with tenure. Although I will note that there has been a diminution in the number of tenure-track jobs in recent years, and that fact has nothing to do with public pressure.
Setting aside the issue, for a moment of whether tenure is a good thing or not, I find Gingrich’s stance to be stunning. Yes, Ward Churchill has said, and will continue to say, hateful thing about the United States, yet how in the world does Mr. Gingrich propose operationalizing the concept of “anti-America” and thereby codifying it into law? And do we really even want to do such a thing? Do we want to unleash a witch hunt in our universities to weed out those who don’t think and speak “the right way”? To what end? What will we, as society, gain from such a process?
Further, even assuming that this is a desirable goal (which I do not see it as such): in whom would we vest the power to make this determination? This would be a remarkable amount of power vested in the hands of state governments–and to what end? Ok, it will make us feel better to deny Churchill his salary, but at what cost?
I find this position especially odd coming from an individual who supposedly favors smaller government and has spoken of the evils of governmental power.
The state should stay out of the policing of thoughts. And yes, I know that the crux of the matter (or, at least, the point of departure for these kinds of arguments) is that public universities are partially paid for via tax dollars. However, what good can possibly come from legislatures micro-managing universities? We have publicly financed colleges and universities not so that states can control what is taught in them; we have them because the public good that such institutions create is worth subsidizing.
I will say this: a lot of university administrators would love to get rid of tenure. It would allow them to cow the faculty, because any uppity professor who dared to challenge the administration would know that their job was on the line, meaning that there would be a whole lot fewer uppity professors to have to deal with. Doing away with tenure would take away the ability of the faculty from being any kind of check on administrations, who often do not make decisions based on the best academic/educational reasons, but rather looking solely at financial considerations. Further, doing away with tenure would allow administrators to create more jobs like this one, noted by OTB’s Leopold Stotch, which has the long-term effect of turning universities into the 13th, 14th, 15th and 16th grades. The tenure system, which requires more than just teaching, helps to guarantee that professors are, indeed, area specialists–i.e., experts in their fields who engage in career-long learning and contribution, not just teachers who get four years of training and then teach essentially the same thing their whole careers (often with inadequate training in the first place–for example: American Government teachers in High School often have had very little actual coursework in the subject–perhaps as few as 3 semester hours).
On a more minor notes, Gingrich statement “Tenure did not exist before the twentieth century, and we had free speech before then.” is a non sequitur. For one thing free speech, per se, isn’t the underlying issue, academic freedom is, which is a related topic, but not the same thing. Further, whether or not there was free speech (or academic freedom) pre-20th century raises questions about the quality of that speech at that time, as well as the nature of the university system in the 19th century.
Really, conservatives make a major mistake in making Ward Churchill representative of the entire academy. Further, he is more effectively an argument against affirmative action hiring, rather than an argument against tenure or some generic critique of the academic world.
Tenure is bad. It should be eliminated. Churchill has the right to free speech, but he has to accept responsibility, and the consequences, of what he says. Why does anyone listen to what Gingrich has to say?
Comment by On The Mark — Friday, February 25, 2024 @ 2:32 pm
Even more scary: Gingrich used to be a college professor himself at Kennesaw State, so he should know better.
Comment by Chris Lawrence — Friday, February 25, 2024 @ 2:37 pm
Beltway Traffic Jam
The daily linkfest:
Steven Taylor disagrees with Newt Gingrich on tenure.
Stephen Green shares his Veal Piccata recipe.
Kate McMillan says to set your TiVos for C-SPAN tomorrow morning.
Ron Bailey explains why old men deserve free Viagra.
Dean E…
Trackback by Outside The Beltway — Friday, February 25, 2024 @ 3:22 pm
The loss of tenure does not necessarily mean that administrations will cow the staff. Employment contracts, unions and other devices can ensure job security. The present system of tenure puts too much power into the hands of professors.
While research is important I will always believe that the primary purpose of a professor is to teach undergraduates. Tenure creates pressures that move professors away from that most important duty.
Tenure may not have to be killed but it must be reformed.
Comment by Steve Plunk — Friday, February 25, 2024 @ 4:05 pm
Churchill is a poster child for Great Clips.
I’m going to take a shower now, and then fix the television naked.
Comment by John Lemon — Friday, February 25, 2024 @ 5:28 pm
Could you actually imagine if Gingrich was on Churchill, riding him like a horsey using his long pony tail as the reins?
They say that such things can’t be imagined, but I’m not the only one, some day we will all ride Churchill and the world will be as one.
Comment by John Lemon — Friday, February 25, 2024 @ 5:34 pm
To: On the Mark.
Tenure is bad, you say?
Here are some other bad things:
Moldy tomatoes that leak juice out of the plastic bag and into the crisper.
Your wife noticing that you are wearing women’s underwear after arriving home from work.
McDonald’s giving out 8 1/2 inch metal bowie knives in their happy meals.
Discovering that alligator you flushed down the toilet never really went all the way down.
Having your PDA accidently imbedded in one of your toenails.
After taking your 4 year old to the movies, realizing that “Van Helsing” is not about that cute little Alpine family that sang its way out of Nazi Germany.
Your best friend being implicated in a plot to replace the dandruff shampoo at your local gym with jet fuel.
Someone poking your eye with a sharp stick.
Strawberry Pop Tarts.
Comment by John Lemon — Friday, February 25, 2024 @ 5:41 pm
Ok if tenure is to be banned then how about the life tenure for SC judges who dodder into their graves writng opinions on important matters. And what about abolishing marriage and alimony because men have murdered their wives to avoid alimony payments. Etc., etc.
And on AA hires–all hires are AA hires based on having the “right” references from the “right” schools, etc. Let’s note that very, very, very few professors even from the so-called “top notch” schools are anything to write home about. At least WC can fill up a 1000 seat hall in his capacity as a “public intellectual”.
Comment by Paradox — Friday, February 25, 2024 @ 8:22 pm
With whom are you arguing?
Comment by Steven Taylor — Friday, February 25, 2024 @ 8:28 pm
Obviously and mainly against those who argue against your position.
Comment by Paradox — Friday, February 25, 2024 @ 9:08 pm
The loss of tenure does not necessarily mean that administrations will cow the staff. Employment contracts, unions and other devices can ensure job security. The present system of tenure puts too much power into the hands of professors.
This has worked so well in the private sector.
Comment by bryan — Saturday, February 26, 2024 @ 10:53 am
Fortunately I’m not one of the AA professors as I still haven’t come face to face with my drinking problem. Hic.
Comment by John Lemon — Saturday, February 26, 2024 @ 2:40 pm
Really tenure is so much like holy orders that it reminds me how so much like an established church our schools and universities are. It is harder for CU to get rid of Churchill as it was for Boston to rid itself of Cardinal Law.
Comment by John Schuh — Sunday, February 27, 2024 @ 2:27 pm
Tenure and the “Golden” Rule
The Ward Churchill affair has had various people wonder whether universities can maintain the concept of tenure. It occurs to me that what everyone is forgetting is the golden rule: namely that he who has the gold makes the rules
Trackback by L'Ombre de l'Olivier — Sunday, February 27, 2024 @ 3:25 pm
BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR.
[The] Speaker Emeritus suggests academic tenure provides no protections academicians would otherwise enjoy …
Trackback by Cold Spring Shops — Sunday, February 27, 2024 @ 11:10 pm
[…] y have used the situation to attack tenure, professors and academic freedom. For example, Newt Gingrich (and alleged small “g” conservative) wants to empower somebody (it is uncle […]
Pingback by PoliBlog: Politics is the Master Science » Questions for Small Government Conservatives — Tuesday, March 1, 2024 @ 10:09 pm