|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Professors at South Carolina’s Clemson University feel significantly more confident that university leadership protects their right to free speech than their counterparts at the state’s flagship institution of higher learning, the University of South Carolina.
That’s according to survey of college faculty recently published by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) – a national pro-First Amendment group.
A majority of the 83 USC professors who responded to the group’s inquiries indicated it was either “not at all clear” or “not very clear” that the university administration protects free speech on campus.
***
***
USC professors were 8% more likely to have reported “toning down” something they recently wrote “for fear of causing controversy” – and were 10% more likely to support the adoption of principles of institutional idealogical neutrality than Clemson faculty members.
While only 4% of Clemson faculty reported to “very often hiding” their political beliefs from other faculty on campus to attempt to keep their job, 11% of University of South Carolina professors indicated they purposely hide their beliefs.
Just seven years ago, South Carolina made FIRE’s list of America’s “ten worst colleges for free speech” – stemming in part from the school’s February 2016 crackdown of a “free speech” event sponsored by chapters of Young Americans for Liberty (YAL) and College Libertarians.
The crackdown came after left-leaning students claimed these groups allegedly violated their “safe spaces” by disseminating flyers that were “offensive” and “triggering” – resulting in a “notice of charge” letter and a discrimination investigation issued by the school to event organizers.
Hoping to remove a negative rating that could tarnish the school’s reputation, South Carolina made a total of four revisions to its policies – elevating it from a “yellow light” rating from FIRE in the summer of 2023. The school’s board of trustees implemented two pro-free speech provisions to its code of conduct – as well as improvements to a comment posting policy on school-hosted websites and revisions to its “Carolinian Creed.”
This year, FIRE granted USC its “green light” rating, indicating they believed Carolina had rectified it’s anti-free-speech culture. FITSNews’ reporting termed the development a “surprise ratings reversal” and wondered whether it was “warranted.”
***
RELATED | UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA GETS ‘GREEN LIGHT’ FOR FREE SPEECH?
***
While FIRE doubtlessly wanted to reward members of the school’s board for implementing some of their requested changes, the results of the group’s own survey would indicate the Palmetto State’s flagship university still fails to empower faculty of every idealogical background to feel as though their careers won’t be hindered by expressing political beliefs outside of the left-wing heterodoxy.
FITSNews has spoken with multiple tenured and non-tenured USC faculty members who attest to feeling pressured by diversity equity and inclusion (DEI) administrators’ presence in department-wide meetings.
These sources noted the frantic scramble to “de-brand” DEI officials when members of the South Carolina General Assembly introduced legislation (H. 4289) attempting to prohibit DEI-based hiring, firing and admissions in South Carolina higher education institutions.
According to our sources, these individuals still work at the university – despite having stripped some of the divisive language from their job titles. Take the USC college of education, which now has an administrative office of “Democracy, Education and Inclusivity.”
(Click to view)
Attempts to subversively scam South Carolina taxpayers (and those paying USC tuition) into funding the implementation of race- and sex-based discrimination might go better if those pushing this division adopted a different acronym after being caught the first go-around. And in case anyone harbored any illusion that this office is anything other than a DEI rebrand, the number one priority listed on the office’s website is “promoting diversity, inclusion, equity, and justice throughout the college.”
One Clemson professor anonymously quoted in the FIRE report said it best – it is neither their role “nor the university’s role to indoctrinate or influence.”
In this professor’s opinion, the university and its faculty “are simply here to share knowledge so that the receiver can use that knowledge how THEY want to use it.”
They are exactly right, and numerous other Southeastern states have taken action to ensure public universities don’t subsidize political activists silencing their idealogical opponents.
***
The University System of Georgia’s Board of Regents recently passed regulations barring “ideological tests, affirmations, and oaths, including diversity statements” from state university job searches, and committed to institutional neutrality on political issues.
Similarly, the state of Florida recently passed legislation mandating state universities eliminate DEI related job positions – a move which resulted in the termination of multiple administrators, saving the University of Florida $5,000,000 in the first year alone.
Florida governor Ron DeSantis appointed a new slate of trustees at the historically politically far-left New College in Sarasota.
Trustee Christopher Rufo wrote in City Journal that the new board’s first year resulted in a turn-over of “approximately 40 percent of existing faculty left the institution through resignation, non-renewal, and other incentives.” Rufo argued that while “the press treated this as a failure” the board believed “each departure created an opening for a better replacement.”
Rufo noted the hiring of some 40 new professors whom he said would help create “the most balanced faculty of any state institution in Florida, with a wider range of opinion than our competitors.”
Rufo said this new structure would employ “faculty members who reflect the basic philosophical commitments of the people of Florida, who, it should be noted, generously fund our operation.”
While South Carolina governor Henry McMaster lacks the authority to unilaterally implement such sweeping changes, the state’s “GOP supermajority” legislature – which can correct the politicization of universities – has yet to wield it’s power to do so.
The aforementioned anti-DEI bill that caused USC officials to wet (they/their) pants failed to make it out of committee in the South Carolina Senate last legislative session.
***
***
The elimination of multiple left-left leaning “Republicans” in 2024 primary elections has the potential to put greater pressure on Senate leadership to advance anti-DEI legislation this legislative session.
Republican senator Matt Leber, who defeated former “sister-senator” Sandy Senn in a hotly-contested primary election, told FITSNews “DEI is a real problem in South Carolina.” Leber, who served in the S.C. House of Representatives last legislative session said he “was part of the effort in the House to address it, and I plan to be a part of the effort to address it in the Senate this session.”
FITSNews will be closely tracking the South Carolina GOP supermajority’s efforts (or lack of efforts) to de-politicize it’s state funded institutions of higher education in the coming legislative session.
***
ABOUT THE AUTHOR …
(Via: Travis Bell)
Dylan Nolan is the director of special projects at FITSNews. He graduated from the Darla Moore school of business in 2021 with an accounting degree. Got a tip or story idea for Dylan? Email him here. You can also engage him socially @DNolan2000.
***
WANNA SOUND OFF?
Got something you’d like to say in response to one of our articles? Or an issue you’d like to address proactively? We have an open microphone policy! Submit your letter to the editor (or guest column) via email HERE. Got a tip for a story? CLICK HERE. Got a technical question or a glitch to report? CLICK HERE.
