News

Will a Princeton Professor Be Fired for Pissing Off Campus Activists?


Princeton The university’s board of trustees has vote to fire Humanities professor Joshua Katz, has revoked his term, ostensibly because of allegations related to an investigation into sexual misconduct. But Katz’s defenders say he is the latest victim of “cancel culture“Punished for criticizing anti-racism initiative on campus in July 2020 essay for the online magazine Quillette.

The instructor had a report that resulted in an unusual move against tenured professor said His conclusions are unrelated to Katz’s controversial claims. But is this simply spinning? Or is there a legitimate case to be made that Katz is being fired from his job because of allegations made to punish him for thinking wrong?

Obviously, not every claim of “culturing the dead” is worthy, and some misdeeds take years to materialize. But here, the “witch hunt” case is quite strong.

That’s right, Katz got into random sex and careers by being in a consensual relationship with a college student under his academic supervision about 15 years ago. The point is, the university dealt with that breach through official channels in 2018 – eventually suspending him without pay for a year, requiring him to undergo counseling and probation for him. three years.

The new investigation and Katz’s subsequent firing are technically based on new allegations: that Katz failed to fully cooperate with the 2018 investigation and that he discouraged students from seeking health advice. mental health at the time of the relationship. But there still exist double-dangerous schemes, i.e. punishing someone twice for the same offence.

Furthermore, there is little doubt that the new investigation was triggered by the political controversy surrounding Katz and his unpopular views.

The real message is that if you offend the orthodoxy of activists on campus, you can and will be punished — even if it’s doubly dangerous.

On July 4, 2020, at the height of the racial “calculation” that followed the police killing of George Floyd, one open letter to Princeton University President Christopher L. Eisgruber and the administration’s request for a major initiative to combat racism at the school was posted online with about 300 faculty signatures. The 48 needs list includes a bag of items from the social justice wish list: expanded “anti-bias training”, student support for anti-racism activism, reconsidering use use standardized tests in admissions, and more.

A few days later, Katz published her response. While he agreed with some of the letter’s proposals — such as expanding a scholarship program to encourage underrepresented minorities to pursue academic careers — he was harshly critical of the force its overall push. In particular, he felt that many of the requirements would not only impose a new academic mainstream but also punish dissidents. He was particularly dismayed by an entry calling for a new faculty committee “to oversee the investigation and discipline of racist practices, incidents, research, and publication by a section of faculty” ( based on the guidelines issued by the commission identifying such offenses). While emphasizing that slurs and racial discrimination should be disciplined, Katz argues that policing scholarships is an unacceptable violation of academic freedom.

The article provoked a backlash from faculty, students and alumni.

There is particular outrage when Katz refers to a group of inactive students, the Black Justice League – approvingly mentioned in the faculty letter – as “a small local terrorist organization”. (Katz argued that this description was based on the group’s history of alleged bullying of students, including Black students, who disagreed with its agenda.) condemn This comment is irresponsible, but also emphasizes that “freedom of speech allows students and faculty to make bold, provocative, or even offensive arguments.”

Four months later, the student newspaper, The Daily Princetonian—which has widely covered the controversy — running a Editor that prompted Princeton to take a tougher stance against “racist speech” and criticize Eisgruber for adhering to a “hardline free speech policy” that prioritized “a principle of abstraction.” image” than the happiness of community members. One of two examples of speech that should have been sanctioned by the newsroom is the Katz article.

That was in November 2020.

A few months later, in February 2021, Princetonian publish a long investigation piece, piece, based on interviews with 18 former students and faculty, Katz alleges a “history of inappropriate behavior toward female students”. The piece not only reveals the secret case involving his relationship with the female student, but also discusses the allegations made by two other former students, who say he violated “multiple times” breaking boundaries” as their mentors – involving dinner for one, gifts like “chocolate and tea from his overseas travels,” overly personal conversations, and One of the women mentioned her displeasure with Katz’s behavior to another professor and to an administrator after graduation, and Katz clear was advised on “appropriate boundaries of friendship between faculty and students.” Neither woman has been charged with sexual harassment or overt romanticism; but Princetonian the article strongly implied that Katz was a serial sex offender.

After the article emerged, the woman who had sex with Katz – and who did not cooperate with the 2018 investigation – filed a complaint and the investigation was reopened.

Without knowing all the details, it is impossible to say with certainty the true extent of the new charges. (Katz’s attorney did not respond to a request for comment.) It’s worth noting that while the complaint includes allegations of sexual harassment, Princeton’s Title IX coordinator waste this statement and found that both Katz and the student were “active and willing participants.”

One can agree or disagree with Katz’s critique of the Princeton faculty letter (I think it’s mostly on point). One can also certainly feel that his “terrorist group” comment is unnecessary (I think it goes too far). Most people would agree that he showed poor judgment in his past romantic relationship with a college student. It is also possible that his openly acknowledged close relationships with the students he has mentored sometimes cross the line of appropriate behavior.

But two things seem obvious.

One, the reopening of a settled case was the result of events sparked by the backlash against Katz’s essay. Two, the university killed Katz even before he was fired by highlighting him in a Presentations on racism at Princeton as part of a required orientation for freshmen last August. (The presentation quoted Katz’s insightful comment about the Black Justice League while omitting his comment about bullying Black students.)

When New York University social psychologist Jonathan Haidt commented on the Katz firing on Twitter by speaking out demoralized In response to Princeton’s crackdown on “dissidents”, some scathing responses suggested that he was confusing dissidents with dissidents. (One of Haidt’s critics, University of Kansas Law School professor Corey Rayburn Yung, falsely accused that Katz was terminated for “sexually harassing” a graduate student.) But Haidt is right, and the idea that Katz’s dismissal is unrelated to the controversy of opinion. His doesn’t pass the laugh test.

No doubt Katz’s criticism of the faculty letter made him a thorn in the side of Princeton. Punishing him for his views or even for his sometimes hyperbolic language would lead to credible accusations that Princeton is “cancelling” the professor to appease a left-wing mob. .

But Eisgruber, who is trying to strike a balance between free speech and social justice, is still under pressure to show that racism is taken seriously. When given the opportunity to solve a misconduct case on its own for which Katz was disciplined, the university took it.

This is not a victory for justice and accountability, or a lesson for professors about responsible interaction with students under their authority. The real message is that if you offend the orthodoxy of activists on campus, you can and will be punished — even if it’s doubly dangerous.





Source link

news7h

News7h: Update the world's latest breaking news online of the day, breaking news, politics, society today, international mainstream news .Updated news 24/7: Entertainment, Sports...at the World everyday world. Hot news, images, video clips that are updated quickly and reliably

Related Articles

Back to top button