An interesting story at Carolina Journal relates that the UNC Board of Governors made a change recently. The title of Distinguished Professor within the UNC system now can only be extended to those within the field of math, science, engineering and technology. Humanities professors are specifically excluded.
It is pretty clear that the Board might have been acting in response to the longstanding, egregious left-wing political and cultural activism that prevails in the state university setting among those that teach the various humanities-related courses. That tends to be much less common among those teaching the hard sciences.
Within the UNC community, there was considerable consternation. However, there was a sole voice of reason:
Ms. Hessick is a professor in the law school. Her acknowledgement that her peers have been enforcing a certain worldview is very important. She went on to add that it weakens the institution because it represents an abandonment of their mission.
I have no idea what her politics are. But she speaks truth in this instance.
The UNC Board of Governors has been far too restrained dealing with the outrages our tax dollars fund within the state university system. This was one small step in the right direction.
Amen !!
Here is a letter I wrote to the UNC General Alumni Magazine back in 2007.
I have been generally unhappy with things at Chapel Hill for a long time. I was just venting my spleen.
Turbulent ’60s Also Marked
By Start of Conservative Revolt
I found Peter Filene’s article, “Personally Authentic,” (May/June Review) nostalgia for the protests of the ’60s, personally overwrought. In his concluding paragraphs, subtitled “Aftermath,” and specifically in the section subtitled “Antiwar,” he recalls the 1973 U.S. withdrawal from Vietnam but neglects to mention one of the consequences — the slaughter of 2 million humans in Cambodia by the Communist Khmer Rouge.
Inasmuch as Filene drew inspiration and a title for his piece from the Students for a Democratic Society’s Port Huron Statement, please let me inform the readers that there was during those turbulent times a movement that had a different world view. The Young Americans for Freedom (YAF) adopted their founding statement on Sept. 11, 1960, at Sharon, Conn.
The full statement is online at:
https://yaf.org/news/the-sharon-statement-a-timeless-declaration-of-conservative-principles/
Included below are pertinent portions.
“We, as young conservatives, believe:
“That foremost among the transcendent values is the individual’s use of his God-given free will, whence derives his right to be free from the restrictions of arbitrary force;
“That the purpose of government is to protect those freedoms through the preservation of internal order, the provision of national defense, and the administration of justice;
“That when government ventures beyond those rightful functions, it accumulates power, which tends to diminish order and liberty;
“That the forces of international Communism are, at present, the greatest single threat to these liberties;
“That the United States should stress victory over, rather than coexistence with, this menace;
and
“That American foreign policy must be judged by this criterion: does it serve the just interests of the United States?”
The Sharon Statement and the YAF were the polar opposites of the SDS and their ilk and were the seed corn of the conservative revolution led by Ronald Reagan. It was, indeed, a defining time in Chapel Hill and at the other universities, and although the radicals had the spotlight, a new breed was arising that saw things differently. To quote Wikipedia: “The two manifestos would frame the ideological struggles on the American college campuses throughout the 1960s” … and beyond.
Fred H. Gregory ’62
Greensboro
Good for you, Fred, that you presented the other side of the story– indeed, the much BETTER side of the story.