1984 at the University of Michigan


Please consider donating to Behind the Black, by giving either a one-time contribution or a regular subscription, as outlined in the tip jar to the right. Your support will allow me to continue covering science and culture as I have for the past twenty years, independent and free from any outside influence.

Fascist academia: The University of Michigan has been sued by a free speech organization for its 1984-like rules that threaten students with punishment, even re-education camps, if they dare express any opinion that might offend its organized thought police.

As the lawsuit says, the university has created an “elaborate investigatory and disciplinary apparatus to suppress and punish speech other students deem ‘demeaning,’ ‘bothersome,’ or ‘hurtful’.” Yes, really: The student disciplinary code defines “harassment” as any “unwanted negative attention perceived as intimidating, demeaning, or bothersome to an individual”

…The university has its version of the Stasi and Orwell’s Thought Police — a “Bias Response Team” that investigates supposed “bias” complaints from offended students — students who can file their complaints anonymously. So if you are accused of wrongdoing, you don’t even have a right to confront your accuser — just like the former citizens of East Germany where the Stasi had literally hundreds of thousands of informers who could be your next-door neighbor or even a member of your own family. Or in this case, a student down the hall or from one of your classes.

If you think this Star Chamber process is limited to verbal speech, think again. Just like the electronic surveillance in Oceania, the “Bias Incident Report Log” posted by Michigan on its website shows that the Bias Response Team may come after you for what you do and say in “On-line/Social Media” communications including texts, emails, and Twitter.

The log also shows that the campus secret police — sorry, the Bias Response Team — also goes after “Off Campus” speech. So students aren’t safe anywhere. Their First Amendment rights are severely restricted, no matter what they are doing or where they are.

So a student may literally receive a knock on his door “from a team of University officials threatening to refer the student to formal disciplinary authorities” for something some unknown, anonymous informant alleges that he said, something the informant doesn’t like, or doesn’t agree with, or is uncomfortable with. Unless, of course, as the complaint says, the student agrees to submit “to ‘restorative justice,’ ‘individual education,’ or ‘unconscious bias training’.”

In other words, the only way a student may be able to avoid formal charges against meritless claims is by agreeing to submit to the academic equivalent of a communist-style “re-education” camp or brainwashing about the latest liberal fad like “unconscious bias.”

Read it all. It is pretty horrible, and makes me wonder why the state government is providing any funds to this fascist-run university. Time to shut it down.

Share

3 comments

  • Chris

    This should be a settlement in the hundreds of billions.
    The cost of free speech is priceless.
    I hope the university is truely bankrupted For this.

  • Jack

    Softest university in the world

  • Edward

    From the article: “In other words, as the complaint says, ‘the most sensitive student on campus effectively dictates the terms under which others may speak.’

    This is known as the heckler’s veto.

    What do you want to bet that I could not successfully create my own veto, because the “Stasi” are not sympathetic with my sensitivity and plight?

    From the article: “One of the students in the lawsuit believes that Black Lives Matter is ‘a hateful group that promotes racial division’ and has ‘sowed division [on campus] through intimidation by, for example, disrupting speakers and events and vandalizing student displays.’

    Why is that sensitive student the one who is intimidated but the hateful (Only) Black Lives Matter group is allowed to spread its obvious hatred in an intimidating manner?

    It seems that freedom of speech is for only certain people or groups (friends of the school) and not for others (enemies). the philosophy is “free speech for me but not for thee.”

    Berkeley is doing something similar, but they are openly stating their anti-conservative bias.
    https://www.dailywire.com/news/30246/uc-berkeley-panel-blames-conservative-speakers-james-barrett

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *