Barnard College president promotes free expression, does not comment on recent anti-free-expression policies at the college

The president of neighboring Barnard College writes:

Now Is the Time for Colleges to Host Difficult Speakers . . . A commitment to nonviolent disagreement should be an obvious part of the fabric of our campuses, just as it is obvious that students need oxygen to breathe. Colleges and universities need to reconfirm our commitment to nonviolent forms of disagreement — even when we are confronted with voices that disparage or dismiss identities and worldviews. This is also a time to foster more disagreement, not less.

I agree. She continues:

Colleges and universities have long resisted polarization and monolithic thinking by invoking these commitments to open discussion and inquiry, and we must continue to do so. College campuses must remain places where students are able to ask and grapple with hard questions, especially those that are uncomfortable and even hurtful. Higher education’s role is not to erase conflict but to channel it into dialogue, debate and learning. To do so, educators and students must face ideas we find offensive and speakers whose words cause pain.

Again, I agree. But as law professor Paul Campos points out, this “commitment to nonviolent forms of disagreement” on the part of the Barnard administration is new. Until recently Barnard has been pretty aggressive about trying to suppress free expression:

Last year came this policy:

Barnard is mandating that students remove any items affixed to room or suite doors by Feb. 28, after which point the college will begin removing any remaining items, Barnard College Dean Leslie Grinage announced in a Friday email to the Barnard community. . . .

“We know that you have been hearing often lately about our community rules and policies. And we know it may feel like a lot,” Grinage wrote. “The goal is to be as clear as possible about the guardrails, and, meeting the current moment, do what we can to support and foster the respect, empathy and kindness that must guide all of our behavior on campus.”

“Support and the respect, empathy and kindness” by not letting people put notices on their doors, huh? This seems like the absolute opposite of “educators and students must face ideas we find offensive and speakers whose words cause pain.” Also, affixing items to your dorm room door is nonviolent! (I’m assuming these items aren’t poison-laden scratch-and-sniff cards.)

Also, notoriously, the Barnard administration attempted to cancel the showing of a controversial film on campus. So, yeah, colleges and universities–including Barnard College, which is a division of Columbia University, where I work–need to reconfirm our commitment to nonviolent forms of disagreement — even when we are confronted with voices that disparage or dismiss identities and worldviews.

In short, I agree with the Barnard president’s op-ed and I think it would’ve been much improved by an acknowledgment that it represents a major change in policy from the recent policies at Barnard College.

If you’re gonna talk about the value of allowing and even promoting nonviolent disagreement, you can at least talk about the difficulty of implementing such recommendations–difficulties that you’ve directly faced at your own institution.

Maybe the Barnard administration could also apologize to the students they hassled regarding the showing of that movie, and they could apologize to the students who they were hassling about messages on their dorm room doors.