New at Reason

Tim Cavanaugh | May 3, 2005

Cathy Young looks at the black and white issues in the academic jihad against college professor Jonathan Bean.

Comments

|5.3.05 @ 11:04AM|#

The hopeful note in the entire shameful episode is the outpouring of support Bean has received from colleagues who don't share his political viewpoints.

|5.3.05 @ 11:57AM|#

Does he have tenure?

|5.3.05 @ 12:00PM|#

College of Liberal Arts Dean Shirley Clay Scott canceled his discussion sections for the week and informed his teaching assistants that they did not have to continue with their duties. Two of the three teaching assistants resigned, leaving the course in a shambles.

If the TAs are still getting their stipend for the semester then I'd say this is a pretty sweet situation!

|5.3.05 @ 12:44PM|#

I want to feel sorry for the Prof, I really do.

But, damn, that particular paragraph he cut, sure alters the way that reads. I'm imagining what I would think if I was in my dorm room and found the article online and linked to the eiaf, hmmm...
those are some freaky people. If that was presented to me without comment and with that paragraph trimmed. I wouldn't be witch hunting him like they are, but I'd sure be watching him funny.

And why did Cathy say this "Jonathan Bean, identifies himself as a libertarian but is widely regarded as a conservative"
when in the link he identifies himself as "(disclosure: I AM a libertarian conservative)"

'jus asking, that's all. I know, 'jus pikin nits.

I would defend his rights. But I suspect I'm defending to his right to not think things through. But I would still defend his rights.

But that particular "edited" article was perhaps not the best way to approach the topic to a bunch of smart ass kids? Plenty of other good sources, regardless of what the article might imply.

Still, this kind of which hunt always makes me sad.

|5.3.05 @ 2:22PM|#

I've had classes where the professor gave out a bunch of small snippets of articles from recent publications. If you wanted the whole thing you could look it up.

I'm not sure if that's what this professor was doing or if this was the only time he's ever given half an article. Still, it's a little scary when the academy is no longer just going after people because of speech -- it's going after people because they are passing out others' speech. It seems like they'll use any justification they can to get rid of a professor they don't agree with.

|5.3.05 @ 3:34PM|#

Sounds like the prof. in question made a pretty large mistake. From the report he handed out a significant portion of the article, while ommiting one part which substantially altered how one should precieve it. For a single such instance of carelesness the punishment that ensued seems disproporntionate to say the least.

Putting all this aside anecdotes are nice, but really don't support Cathy's concluding paragraph. Perhaps this does point to a prevalance of bias against conservatives, alternatively this could just indicate a general overreaction to racially biased issues. The later while an important issue to discuss is not nearly as serious as persecution of conservatives generally.

As for the comparison to communism I don't think this is quite apt. The palestinian comparison is slightly more so. But the best comparison currently is to terrorism, and particularly to people who in some way praised the terrorists. And in fact one such professor at my school was punished and created just such an uproar by doing so (in an insensitive but exceedingly minor fashion). The reason I prefer this comparison is that both terrorism and racial bias are things people precieve as affecting them and those they know. Communism is no longer a personal threat, and the palestinian/israeli issue never was personal except for a few.

To actually convince me of this bias, one would need actual data (not the plural of anecdote). For example a correlation of disciplinary action with political leaning for professors.

fyodor|5.3.05 @ 3:51PM|#

Good post, drew.

In general, I think it only goes so far to say, "Imagine what would happen if..." Concrete examples (or counter-examples) would be a lot more valuable.

|5.3.05 @ 4:15PM|#

Just for the info: Dr. Bean is teh faculty advisor for both the College Republicans -and- the Students for a Libertarian Society here. One wonders on which side his true loyalties lie.

|5.3.05 @ 4:24PM|#

Indeed, if this case is any indication, conservatives on many campuses are not just a rare breed but an endangered species.

Quite a load of crap, even for this story. This just continues to add to the conservative whining about liberal campuses. My college, like many others, has a reasonable balance of liberal and conservative thinking. I admit, junior college had me leaning left but my 4 year sent me out being mostly libertarian, certainly financially conservative. My girlfriend went to a very conservative lutheran university and is your typical urban female ultra-liberal.

If I say the sky is yellow enough times, the sky will be yellow in do time!

|5.3.05 @ 8:07PM|#

I think the rush to punishment without proper process was inappropriate in this case.

I also think there *may* be something to the claims that conservative academics are unjustly treated.

However, I don't think this case is truly an example of unjust political discrimination.

|5.4.05 @ 11:45AM|#

Nobody covered themselves with glory in this episode. Professor Bean was guilty of very poor judgement and considerable disingenuousness in his selection and editing of the article in question. If he used it at all, it would have been far better to present it unedited and juxtaposed with articles from black activists and other commentators to illustrate the full spectrum of reactions sparked by the Zebra killings.

The leftist professors were incredibly unprofessional in their jihad against Bean, particularly in their public denunciations in the school's newspaper - it reduces them to the level of Maoist Red Guards. They were certainly within their rights to complain to the administration, but their publicity-seeking and posturing served only served to eliminate any sympathy for their position.

As an aside, what a weird venue for this brouhaha! Southern Illinois isn't exactly a hotbed of leftist thought - I never would have thought that SIUC would have had such a concentration of radical relics.

|5.9.05 @ 1:38PM|#

Prof. Bean is no different that the other professors on SIUC's campus. If you look up the professors that accused him on campus they are strong Marxists and have published books about the topic. Over sensitivity has taken over our campus. If you are a Marxist, Communist, or whatever; you have the right to establish your point of view. A university is suppose to be a place where people of different educated views can come together and discuss different topics. Prof. Bean is the only "conservative" leaning professor in the history department, which says a lot about who is in control...