Hey parents, look at what your annual $63,916 tuition check is paying for!
An editorial from Wellesley College’s student newspaper put out a call to arms on Wednesday against anyone who engages in alleged “racist” behavior.
Ironically enough, the piece starts out responding to what the author sees as unfair allegations that Wellesley students and professors foster “an environment where free speech is not allowed or is a violated right. Many outside sources have painted us as a bunch of hot house flowers who cannot exist in the real world.”
Metaphysical implications about the inability to “exist in the real world” aside, the author argues free speech isn’t threatened at the all-female liberal art’s college (alumnae include two-time failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, dowager news siren Diane Sawyer, and professional wrestling manager and pornographic actress Tamara Lynn Sytch), but only that the “Wellesley community will not stand for hate speech, and will call it out when possible.” Such a pronouncement might be reasonable if anyone with half a brain had faith in college students or professors to honestly and accurately identify supposed “hate speech.”
The illiteracy of the author shines through when he/she/xi/fee/fi/fo/fum writes, “Shutting down rhetoric that undermines the existence and rights of others is not a violation of free speech; it is hate speech.” The author clearly took advantage of Wellesley’s stellar history department because the references to the American founding couldn’t be stronger:
“The founding fathers put free speech in the Constitution as a way to protect the disenfranchised and to protect individual citizens from the power of the government. The spirit of free speech is to protect the suppressed, not to protect a free-for-all where anything is acceptable, no matter how hateful and damaging, [Insert CNN chyron: This is wrong and idiotic],” the editorial claims.
Things get more interesting when the writer declares that “hostility may be warranted” against those who “refuse to adapt their beliefs” or engage in racism after (I’m assuming) Wellesley’s nightly struggle sessions. If an individual continues supporting “racist politicians” then “appropriate measures” should be taken “to hold them accountable for their actions.” Nowhere does the editorial specify what actions should be taken, but I’d happily accept getting my fingernails ripped off if it meant never having to read something like this ever again.
The editorial ends by saying “We at The Wellesley News, [sic] are not interested in any type of tone policing.” Such a transparent about-face makes me wonder if this was just another postmodern exercise or whether this editorial was just a copied scribbling from one of Jacques Derrida’s notebooks.
“Our student body is not only smart, it is also kind,” reads the penultimate sentence.
Apparently the editors of The Wellesley News don’t want the rest of the country to see how smart and kind they are because as of 10:58 on Friday, the newspaper’s entire website has been taken off-line.