MIT Canceled a Professor's Guest Lecture Because He Opposes Race-Based Admissions
"This idea of intellectual debate and rigor as the pinnacle of intellectualism comes from a world in which white men dominated," says one of the cancellation's defenders.

Dorian Abbot is a geophysicist at the University of Chicago. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) invited him to deliver a guest lecture on climate change, then canceled the talk due to campus outrage over his views.
Notably, it was not Abbot's views on climate change that prompted the student, staff, and alumni revolt. It was his views on affirmative action: He had publicly criticized race-based personnel decisions in higher education. His views on these issues are not outside the mainstream—a majority of the voters in California, of all places, also oppose race-based preferences. Yet MIT decided it would be better not to risk further upsetting a coterie of extremely irritated activist voices.
This happened a few weeks ago, but it recently drew the attention of The New York Times. The paper obtained comments from the head of MIT's earth sciences department, who defended the decision to cancel the lecture:
He stressed that he talked to senior officials at M.I.T. before deciding to cancel the lecture. "It was not who shouted the loudest," Dr. van der Hilst said. "I listened very carefully."
Dr. van der Hilst speculated that Black students might well have been repelled if they learned of Dr. Abbot's views on affirmative action. This lecture program was founded to explore new findings on climate science and M.I.T. has hoped to attract such students to the school. He acknowledged that these same students might well in years to come encounter professors, mentors even, who hold political views at odds with their own.
"Those are good questions but somewhat hypothetical," Dr. van der Hilst said. "Freedom of speech goes very far but it makes civility difficult."
A scientist at another school defended the cancellation in even stronger terms:
Phoebe A. Cohen is a geosciences professor and department chair at Williams College and one of many who expressed anger on Twitter at M.I.T.'s decision to invite Dr. Abbot to speak, given that he has spoken against affirmative action in the past.
Dr. Cohen agreed that Dr. Abbot's views reflect a broad current in American society. Ideally, she said, a university should not invite speakers who do not share its values on diversity and affirmative action. Nor was she enamored of M.I.T.'s offer to let him speak at a later date to the M.I.T. professors. "Honestly, I don't know that I agree with that choice," she said. "To me, the professional consequences are extremely minimal."
What, she was asked, of the effect on academic debate? Should the academy serve as a bastion of unfettered speech?
"This idea of intellectual debate and rigor as the pinnacle of intellectualism comes from a world in which white men dominated," she replied.
It should be obvious that no place of healthy and open inquiry could thrive under such rigid ideological requirements.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Our civilization is doomed when the leading technical university in the nation has been swallowed by cancel culture. Next up professors at Cal Tech will have to show party membership cards to teach.
You just can't write satire any more.
I am making a good salary online from home .I’ve made 97,999 dollar’s so for the last 5 months working online and I’m a full time student .DEc I’m using an online business opportunity. I’m just so happy that I found out about it.
For more detail … READ MORE
Seriously I don’t know why more people haven’t tried this, I work two shifts, 2 hours in the day and 2 in the evening…wig And i get surly a check of $12600 what’s awesome is I m working from home so I get more time with my kids.
Try it, you won’t regret it........VISIT HERE
I'm pro-murdering murderers.
Can we get this bitch canceled?
I checked out her faculty page--she looks exactly like you'd expect someone with her politics to look.
Remember - diversity is our strength!
I am making a good salary online from home. I’ve made 97,999 dollar’s so for last 5 months working online and I’m a full time student.VNu I’m using an online business opportunity I’m just so happy that I found out about it.
Try it, you won't regret it!........ VISIT HERE
You can try, but nobody will be able to tell it was supposed to be satire.
Hey Guys, I know you read many news comments and posts to earn money online jobs. Some people don’t know how to earn money and are saying to fake it. You trust me. I just started this 4 weeks ago. I’ve got my FIRST check total of $1850, pretty cool. I hope you tried it.QAc You don’t need to invest anything. Just click and open the page to click the first statement and check jobs .. ..
Go Here................ Pays 24
Satire, another evil white invention.
Best Response:
You're welcome.
From Mark Perry via Café Hayek:
Should have added -- I don't know exactly what that means -- why is Cal Tech listed twice? Is the first mention a different Cal Tech in Maryland? Is the second listing two universities, or a third Cal Tech in Pennsylvania?
A Blazing Saddles reference?
Oh, and there is a
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_University_of_Pennsylvania
I'm beginning to think it just might be inevitable.
Our civilization is doomed when the leading technical university in the nation has been swallowed by cancel culture.
That's fine with Harvard - their president went to MIT
MIT has had Noam Chomsky on its faculty since 1955. He's an "institute professor emeritus" to this day. For some reason, this "tech school" has social science and humanities departments, which are just as likely to be infested by pinkos as any other "major research university."
Every time I read one of these stories I become more and more glad that I decided not to go to MIT.
Seems the only thing MIT is leading in is racism.
The point about CA is great. Even in crazy commie land they wouldn't even vote to approve AA. The country as a whole is against it.
People need to stop caring what left wing twitter thinks and tell them to fuck off. The fact that "I want people to be judged by the content of their character" or "I want people judged for a position based on merit and not skin color" have become akin to racism for todays pussified progs says everything.
The only response to these children is to tell them to grow up and or fuck off
"This idea of intellectual debate and rigor as the pinnacle of intellectualism comes from a world in which white men dominated," she replied.
And then everyone in the faculty nodded.
Cowards. All of them.
And stupid cunts, who at least could be consistent and reject all knowledge, and related technology, that those white men produced.
Let them try drum circles, and "geology" that focuses on the healing power of crystals.
Does she ever use antibiotics? Cars or public transportation? Computers or mobile devices? The list goes on. All came from a world in which white men dominated.
My favorite part is that she says it in the past tense.
My favorite part is the inference that only white men support intellectual debate and rigor as the pinnacle of intellectualism.
Jesus, she is a racist and sexist asshole.
Do you think she's ever heard of the Scottish Enlightenment?
I think she would be mostly correct. Diversity will extinguish the enlightenment.
A friend of mine refers to these days as "The Endarkenment".
MIT wouldn't welcome Thomas Sowell?
Absolutely they wouldn’t.
Too white.
Too intellectual.
Stop Asian Hate!
"Dr. van der Hilst speculated that Black students might well have been repelled if they learned of Dr. Abbot's views on affirmative action."
How about asking the black students instead of speculating for them?
Because all black people think and act alike, as a hive mind, so you only need to talk to 1 black person to know how they all feel
A couple of weeks after the election I was making a delivery to a customer. Their covid protocol in the past required that visitors call a phone number posted on a locked door and make their case. A black man probably in his 30s was working outside wearing a mask. He told me that I'd have to go to a different door and walk in. I said something like "shit, guess I gotta go get a mask". He said "Trump, right?" I hesitated to respond because I learned long ago that business is business and politics and business don't mix. He took off his mask, looked me straight in the eye, put a thumb up and said "Trump right?" I said well that's who I voted for. He went into a tirade about the stolen election and how Trump should be executing these treasonous motherfuckers. I guess I know now how all black people feel. True story.
I guess he wouldn't be allowed on the MIT campus.
"Because all black people think and act alike, as a hive mind, so you only need to talk to 1 black person to know how they all feel"
It's worse than that. Regressives now believe that most black people are too stupid to know how to feel, so they should only listen to a black person that white Regressives chose as a representative of the race - and in one way or another, pay to mouth the expected slogans.
You haven't noticed that progressives don't ask questions, they speculate or make assumptions based on their biases?
Because actually asking black people might shatter the narrative the progressive white knights are spinning. They might also find it offensive to find the champions of blacks and minorities actually think of them as lesser people incapable of standing on their own merit.
MIT Admissions Department favors melanin over math skills?
The world’s most important chemical.
BOWF SIDEZ!
This cancellation is only an "attempt". It's not that this ideology at MIT is a "done deal".
Rageaholic throws a bucket of icewater on Sinema's so-called careful moderation and defiance of her own party.
She's like the Mafia.
Also, it's the fault of the Supreme Court that people are turned off of politics.
I'm not making this up.
https://www.alternet.org/2021/10/kyrsten-sinema-corruption/?share_id=6724392
There can be no dissent from the party line. If there is... it must be conspiracy!
Rageaholic/Gabbard 2024!
Something Dorian Abbot wrote keeps coming back to me. He said something to the effect of 'imposing woke cancel culture on academia will restrict the pool of scientists you're talking to and collaborating with'. You know what? Long-term, he is right. Take out that collaboration and innovation slows way down. When I think about it, that is the best argument I've heard for why 'woke' turns everything to shit.
Well, sure--empires typically don't collapse all at once, it's generally a very long process of internal rot or ennui.
"Peace has cost you your strength; victory has defeated you!"
I. Newton: An object at rest stays at rest and an object in motion stays in motion with the same speed and in the same direction unless acted upon by an unbalanced force.
Extremely Irritated Activist Voices: You're a racist.
Decolonize gravity.
See, an actual example of "systemic racism" that you can identify the next time a race divider tells you that it exists.
Indeed. Though I suspect that Cohen et al refuse to recognize that they are part of a racist, sexist system.
This lecture program was founded to explore new findings on climate science and M.I.T. has hoped to attract such students to the school.
Climate Science! and cancel culture. Could there be a link?
"The worm... spice... is there a relationship?"
😉
This is the classic quote from the piece: "Freedom of speech goes very far but it makes civility difficult."
I'm usually very proud I graduated from MIT. I'm less so today. For what it's worth, I wrote a sternly worded email to Dr. van der Hilst. I doubt it will make a difference.
I'm appalled. "Freedom of speech...makes civility difficult?" Nonsense! _Treating people uncivilly_ makes civility difficult and that's entirely on the people _being uncivil_. MIT faculty and students used to take nerdy pride in being a bunch of unemotional robots who didn't bow to social pressure. No longer, I guess.
Unless you're a substantial donor, they won't care. Or I assume so, from my experiences with Northwestern.
Though they have successfully ensured that while I was merely a minor donor, now I am no donor at all.
I've stopped giving to my alma mater, UC Berkeley. Also a minor donor & now no donor at all.
Yeah, yeah, they were far to the Left even in my days there--the era of "Political Correctness". But this ultra-Wokeism is a bridge too far.
I graduated from Georgia Tech..the last few years it has gone way woke and I refuse to give them a dime. They just sent me an invite to give part of my inheritance to them (I'm in my late 50's now) and they can't wait for me to kick the bucket and give them money..not a chance until they get rid of the "gender and race" office and pushing wokism on the students. For the record I was from the Northeast and an ethnic kid...there were very few Italian kids at Georgia Tech back in the 80's and I wasn't treated differently than any of the southern kids...I was expected to take the same tests and do as well. never say any racism there...if you could do the work you got through.
I wonder what MIT thinks of Tom Massie..a rural white kids whose parents were blue collar and he earned a BS and MS at MIT in two different engineering disciplines and won the solar powered car challenge.....
Massie had White privilege. Duh.
Math is racist...engineering is racist...MIT is becoming a joke. Engineers need to take back the university..get rid of the fucking Keynsian economics department of idiots first..then shut down all non hard science or engineering schools. Make admission based on HS grads and the SAT math portion. And don't give a damn about "social outcomes"..the bar doesn't discriminate...if your tribe can't reach the bar..do something about why...look at culture..
It's probably too late at this point. These are the fruits of 50 years of Marcusian-inspired cultural Marxism being cultivated.
Dr. van der Hilst is a racist. He looks at skin color and decides who you are.
Classic racist.
I would LOVE to know what her pinnacle of intellectualism is.
Tucker interviewed him in Fox Nation.
"This idea of intellectual debate and rigor as the pinnacle of intellectualism comes from a world in which white men dominated," says one of the cancellation's defenders.
And this idea of intellectual debate and rigor comes from another world.
Technically, going by their defense of their actions, they "merely" reconsidered exposing the public, including vulnerable BIPOC youth, to the taint of this guest speaker. They're allegedly inviting him to a lecture confined to MIT people.
Everybody wins! The trained scientifical people at MIT get to hear about climate change, but the unwashed masses and the vulnerable youth won't be injured by listening to a scientific speech by someone who agrees with the general public in opposing racial preferences.
Let me emphasize that, so long as MIT follows its own policies, they're not violating anyone's rights. Nor do I advocate an unlimited "academic freedom." I'm suggesting that universities should invite sciency speakers without regard to their views on nonscientific subjects, unless those views are *really* beyond the pale - and agreeing with the public on racial preferences is well within the pale.
Yeah, I agree. MIT has the right to do what they want; they're not a public university where the First Amendment applies. But insisting that speakers hold beliefs that they aren't even talking about in their speech is something they *shouldn't* do.
not when they take as much public money as they do...can't have it both ways.
MIT can set their own policies - but _this_ policy is institutional suicide. It will destroy the scientific and engineering rigor that made MIT's reputation.
"This idea of intellectual debate and rigor as the pinnacle of intellectualism comes from a world in which has the naive notion that black people are just as capable as anyone else," what one of the cancellation's defenders really meant.
shikshaved
Admissions should be based completely upon merit and not based on race, gender, sexuality, political affiliations, etc..
Admissions interviews should be conducted in manner where these aspects are hidden from the interviewer.
Simply put, Colleges and Universities should be places where the students are able to explore and learn about various ideas that are in opposition to each other and decide for themselves what they believe and support.
Unfortunately, Colleges and Universities are fast becoming institutions of indoctrination instead of institutions of higher thought.
MIT can do what it wants to, but this doesn't make them look very good. It also erodes the purpose and legitimacy of the institution.
The only reason people object to Abbotts stance is because they know they are on the wrong side of the issue and have no argument.
You can't argue against racial or other discrimination on the one hand, and endorse it on the other without suffering from the cognitive dissonance.
So they have to use political pressure. It works in the short-term but will have blow-back in the longer-term.
'"This idea of intellectual debate and rigor as the pinnacle of intellectualism comes from a world in which white men dominated," she replied."'
Wow. I bet her classes are a real hoot.
More like Dr. Van Hitler. Am I right?
“This idea of intellectual debate and rigor as the pinnacle of intellectualism comes from a world in which white men dominated,”
Soooo.
The article has a typo. It should have been Dr. van der Hitler.