John Stossel: Privileged campus protesters play the victim |
Featured Commentary

John Stossel: Privileged campus protesters play the victim

Sonja Breda, 23, right, holds a sign saying 'Stop Betsy' as a group of survivors of sexual violence and their supporters gather to protest proposed changes to Title IX before a speech by Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, Thursday, Sept. 7, 2017, at the George Mason University Arlington, Va., campus.

I’m not surprised that mobs shriek at Trump administration officials in restaurants and that Democratic California Rep. Maxine Waters wants more of that. I’ve watched this happen at American colleges.

Heather Mac Donald is a Manhattan Institute scholar who wrote the book “The War on Cops.” She argues that Americans are less safe today because police, for fear of being called racist, back off. At UCLA, when she was allowed to give her “Blue Lives Matter” speech, many in the audience applauded. But then “they stormed the stage,” she explains. The protesters, both white and black, shouting “Black lives — they matter!” drowned out any possible questions.

“It’s almost an expectation that if you’re a minority student on campus, you’re there to protest,” Mac Donald told me.

Eventually, the UCLA protesters took over the stage. No further discussion was possible.

From UCLA, Mac Donald went to Claremont University, where she was met with posters that said her speech should be “shut down” because she is an “anti-black fascist.”

“This is preposterous. I have spent enormous amounts of time in high-crime, minority neighborhoods talking to good people there who are desperate for more police, who have a right to expect the same freedom from fear that people in safer neighborhoods take for granted,” she replied. “My agenda is to try to give voice to these people. To say that I’m anti-black is ridiculous.”

Claremont activists blocked the entrance to the lecture hall where Mac Donald was scheduled to speak. Mac Donald gave her speech to the empty room, and that was recorded for the internet, but no students could ask questions because they couldn’t get in.

“The protesters are the ones engaging in what is clearly historically fascist behavior,” said Mac Donald later. “In the case of the Berkeley riots, vandalizing, breaking glass, setting fires, beating people up. But they go under the moniker ‘anti-fascist.’ … They called me a fascist. But I have not tried to silence anybody.”

Years ago, California Gov. Ronald Reagan called Claremont “a place that fosters discussion and debate … where a student could learn to deal with controversy.”

No more, wrote Mac Donald in a City Journal article titled “From Culture to Cupcakes.”

“College once promoted an understanding of Western culture,” she says. “Today … there is an enormous bureaucratic infrastructure dedicated to teaching students that they’re victims.”

She calls that the diversity bureaucracy.

“UCLA has a Vice Chancellor for Equity, Diversity and Inclusion (who) makes $445,000 a year. The Berkeley Division of Equity and Diversity Inclusion has a $20 million budget.”

She warns, “There’s a co-dependency between the exploding diversity bureaucracy and these narcissistic, delusional students who act out little psychodramas of oppression before an appreciative audience of diversity bureaucrats.

“These students … are among the most privileged human beings in human history. To be at an American college with educational resources available to them that the Renaissance humanists would have killed for. (Yet they) think of themselves as victims. That, to me, is a very sad state of delusion.”

These “victims” now feel entitled to censor other people’s speech, but differences won’t be resolved without debate. Politicians don’t help when they encourage their supporters to get rough, as Trump did on the campaign trail and as Waters now has.

At least the college kids may outgrow this behavior. We’re stuck with the politicians.

John Stossel is a columnist for the Tribune Content Agency.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.