On Monday's CNN Tonight, John McWhorter rebuked left-wing activists for suppressing free speech on many college campuses. McWhorter contended that they are "proposing that racism, and that which offends me, is the same sort of thing...and, therefore, they feel like they're in the right to shut down any kind of discussion." McWhorter later underlined that "you [can] get to the point that you can define just about anything a white person does or says as a micro-aggression." He condemned this as "bullying out of a sense that somehow, white people deserve this after all of these years of racism." [video below]
Host Don Lemon led into the segment with the liberal Columbia University academic by highlighting President Obama's recent critique of the "unwillingness to hear other points of view" from the left on college campus. He first asked Professor McWhorter, "He's [Obama is] not such a fan of political correctness on college campuses...So, what is this that's going on? Isn't it better, rather than shutting someone down, to listen what they have to say; so then, you learn how to argue against it?"
The guest replied with an analysis of the origin of this radical activism, especially on the issue of race, on college campuses:
JOHN MCWHORTER, LINGUISTICS PROFESSOR, COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY: Oh, no, Don — not when it comes to racism — is what these people are thinking. They're thinking that there are certain things that are off the table. And you know, let's admit it: there are some things that are off the table, even if you're going to talk about free speech. We're not going to have a discussion about whether or not women should vote. We're not going to have a discussion about whether genocide is good. These people are proposing that racism, and that which offends me, is the same sort of thing — that, all of a sudden, free speech doesn't matter because we're talking about something where all the talking has already been done; and, therefore, they feel like they're in the right to shut down any kind of discussion.
LEMON: Where does this come from?
MCWHORTER: This starts, I think, with the interest in what's called 'micro-aggressions.' And so, what we used to call 'it's the little things' — the kind of racism that's just little X — little things that are annoying. That started being discussed extensively on college campuses about four years ago. Add to that, Black Lives Matter and the protest model, and you have a combination that makes a lot of students feel that what their job is, is to show that the campus is a very racist place, and to show it in extremely uncompromising terms, as if this was the same thing as people walking across a bridge in Selma.
Moments later, McWhorter asserted that "there is a such thing as a micro-aggression....But when you get to the point that you can define just about anything a white person does or says as a micro-aggression, what you're really doing is bullying out of a sense that somehow, white people deserve this after all of these years of racism. And the problem is, it's not constructive."
The Columbia professor also cited an incident from his college days where a woman told an unfunny racist joke: "Even in 1984, that was pretty tacky. But I didn't walk out crying. I didn't write an editorial in the paper. I thought, boy, I am better than her — and I still feel it now. And I think all of us could benefit from some of that."
Lemon and McWhorter then spent a good portion of the segment discussing three examples where left-wing race activists in academia went too far: "social justice place mats" at Harvard (where the anchor noted that he and others at CNN thought, "This is ridiculous. It sounds like indoctrination"); Asian students at Oberlin College complaining about "inauthentic cafeteria Vietnamese and Chinese food;" and Cornell University putting out a "list of approved holiday decorations." [screen cap of Harvard place mat at right]
Near the end of the segment, the liberal guest did reveal one cause where he agreed with campus protesters: "I've taken some heat for this — I do think that Woodrow Wilson's name and face should be suppressed at Princeton. Woodrow Wilson on race was a terrible man, and more terrible than he needed to be — even as a southerner at that time. He really did destroy a lot of black lives. I get it. That's a reasonable demand. I wouldn't sit in somebody's office about it." He concluded that many activists "start out sensible; and then, they end up doing something that hurts their cause and doesn't create anything except endless dissension."
Back in July 2015, McWhorter outlined his theory that the anti-racist cause on the left has become a "new religion." The professor criticized how "we have a religion in that, there is scripture; and there are questions you're not supposed to ask; and there is original sin...the scripture says that America is based on racism, and that racism is what America is all about today." He added that "the idea that you're supposed to engage or ask questions...that's considered...heretical....You're racist. You don't get it."
The full transcript of the John McWhorter segment from the December 21, 2015 edition of CNN Tonight:
DON LEMON: College campuses used to be the last bastions of free speech, where conflicting points of were accepted in open dialogue for intellectual debate. Well, today, in the age of political correctness, many believe that is no longer the case.
Here's what President Barack Obama told Steve Inskeep of NPR.
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA (from NPR interview): I do think that there have been times on college campuses where I get concerned that the unwillingness to hear other points of view can be as unhealthy on the left as on the right. Feel free to disagree with somebody, but don't try to just shut them up.
[CNN Graphic: "The Age Of Political Correctness: Politics Of Political Correctness; Obama On P.C. Culture On College Campuses"]
LEMON: Joining me now is John McWhorter, linguistics professor at Columbia University, and author of 'The Language Hoax.' Good to see you. So, this is the first time that the President has spoken out about this. He doesn't — he's not such a fan of political correctness on college campuses — and you and I have talked about it. So, what is this that's going on? Isn't it better, rather than shutting someone down, to listen what they have to say; so then, you learn how to argue against it?
JOHN MCWHORTER, LINGUISTICS PROFESSOR, COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY: Oh, no, Don — not when it comes to racism — is what these people are thinking. They're thinking that there are certain things that are off the table. And you know, let's admit it: there are some things that are off the table, even if you're going to talk about free speech. We're not going to have a discussion about whether or not women should vote. We're not going to have a discussion about whether genocide is good. These people are proposing that racism, and that which offends me, is the same sort of thing — that, all of a sudden, free speech doesn't matter because we're talking about something where all the talking has already been done; and, therefore, they feel like they're in the right to shut down any kind of discussion.
[CNN Graphic: "Sensitivity Vs. Free Speech; Is Free Speech In Danger On College Campuses?"]
LEMON: Where does this come from?
MCWHORTER: This starts, I think, with the interest in what's called 'micro-aggressions.' And so, what we used to call 'it's the little things' — the kind of racism that's just little X — little things that are annoying. That started being discussed extensively on college campuses about four years ago. Add to that, Black Lives Matter and the protest model, and you have a combination that makes a lot of students feel that what their job is, is to show that the campus is a very racist place, and to show it in extremely uncompromising terms, as if this was the same thing as people walking across a bridge in Selma.
LEMON: All right. And you write about this. You said this last month in your article called, 'Closed Minds on Campus' — talking about micro-aggressions and all these protected safe spaces. You said, 'Too often, the definition of micro-aggressions is so broad as to condemn almost anything a white person says or does. It is forbidden to associate someone's color with any particular tree because it is stereotyping. But then, it is also forbidden to say that one doesn't see color at all — and to question a person of color's claim of being discriminated against. What begins as a plea for compassion becomes a kind of bullying.'
MCWHORTER: Yeah. Unfortunately, we have the kind of thing where it begin with sense. There is a such thing as a micro-aggression. I've felt them. I'm sure you have. But when you get to the point that you can define just about anything a white person does or says as a micro-aggression, what you're really doing is bullying out of a sense that somehow, white people deserve this after all of these years of racism. And the problem is, it's not constructive; and it essentially just creates strife, because even the best minded of white people are going to push back against that.
LEMON: Is it — but do you think that we're creating that somehow — she said we're creating a whole generation of whiners — are being raised and — where other opinions don't count except for your own? Your own opinions are the only ones that are protected, but other's people opinions are not protected. So, every little offense — every little thing offends you.
[CNN Graphic: "A Generation Of Whiners?"]
MCWHORTER: Now, I don't know if it's a whole generation. But in a way, what we're seeing is a little bit more disturbing, because I think a great many people — probably, the majority of people of color on a college campus — are watching a lot of these things. Some of them feel it's overblown; some of them aren't interested. But one is not to talk about that kind of thing — especially, if one is a person of color. So, the idea is that this way of approaching these things has a place at the table — and that's a problem, because this place at the table is one from which people feel like they're being enlightened to tell everybody to shut up.
LEMON: Yeah. You write in the piece — you talk about James Meredith. You said none of these people has gone through some — you know, an experience like a James Meredith; and certainly, an experience when you — and I was in college in the 80's—
MCWHORTER: Me, too—
LEMON: And, you know, you would hear things—
MCWHORTER: Stuff happens—
LEMON: Right—
MCWHORTER: Right—
LEMON: But it also gave you a backbone.
MCWHORTER: Yeah. I mean, I always kind of felt — boy, they sure are backwards—
LEMON: Yeah—
MCWHORTER: Like once, I was at a bar — and it was an open mike night — and a white woman got up and told a joke. She said, 'What do you call a hundred-fifty black people at the bottom of the ocean? A good start.' And there were some scattered laughs. Even in 1984, that was pretty tacky. But I didn't walk out crying. I didn't write an editorial in the paper. I thought, boy, I am better than her — and I still feel it now. And I think all of us could benefit from some of that.
Now, Don, I want to say: not if it's a party, where somebody's standing in the door, saying, only white girls can come in. Yes, you have to fight against that. But some of these littler things — I think the idea is that a healthy human being learns to walk on — even if it has to do with racism. Racism isn't different in that way.
LEMON: Yeah — point taken; point taken with that. Let's talk about these place mats. I don't know if you've seen — this is a Harvard issue. And here's the thing. It's telling students how to talk about issues like Black Lives Matter; Syrian refugees. I mean, does this sound like — when you look at it — and we have gone through it on this program. I have not — from the liberal-est of liberals on the show to the most conservative, it all said, this is ridiculous. It sounds like indoctrination to them. What about you?
MCWHORTER: Yeah. It's very simple. With those place mats, if the idea is, here is what you say that will transform a person's mind and show them that you're right — hopeless. That's not how these things work — issues of racism; issues of discrimination; issues of Donald Trump — are too complicated to yield to them. It seems like these place mats are designed for you to have this, quote on quote, 'conversation' with this racist uncle that we see all over Facebook; and then, the racist uncle doesn't understand and fulminates; and then, you get to feel superior because he's one of the people out there who just doesn't understand.
These things are about dialogue. We're not going to have a dialogue about whether or not women can vote. We have gotten past that. Race, however, is more complicated than that in many ways, and the conversation will continue.
[CNN Graphic: "Harvard's 'Holiday Placemat For Social Justice'"]
LEMON: This goes beyond black and white. Oberlin — a number of Asian students complained about inauthentic cafeteria Vietnamese and Chinese food — calling it cultural appropriation on the part of the dining hall. How does that fit into this?
MCWHORTER: Oh, God, it's as simple as this: you have to basically — talk about a conversation. So sir, how does it hurt you that this banh mi wasn't made in the proper way? It's a different kind of bread — and that's an insult to you because —what? Well, the bread is different, and that means that they're purveying an inauthentic version of my food. And then, you say, well, why can't you just tell people what the proper way is; and why won't people realize what the good version is when they're not in a cafeteria, whose food is never good in the first place. You can just box somebody into a corner. (Lemon laughs) They're seeking to be upset in this case, because they feel like it's what make them wise people.
LEMON: Cornell put out a list of approved holiday decorations, where students are basically — only snowflakes make the cut. So, if you want to put up some holly or wreath with a bow, you need to talk it over first with either floormates or your roommates. (Lemon laughs)
MCWHORTER: Well, you know, I think that holiday celebrations — all of them — should have their decorations up. The idea of being offended at tinsel — frankly, we live in a very difficult world—
LEMON: Yeah—
MCWHORTER: Life is really hard. I don't think that Santa Claus and tinsel should be categorized as offenses.
LEMON: The concern, I think, for many is that — you know, you sit here in a little bit — it's a little tongue and cheek, right? But — and I know that — that your work is very genuine and serious — but I think the concern is that when you look at so many small things, and you take a offense at so many small things, that the big things — people start to say — you know, they start to be overshadowed by all this little stuff that really doesn't matter.
MCWHORTER: Oh, yeah. For example, there is racism on college campuses—
LEMON: Exactly—
MCWHORTER: You and I felt it, and it didn't go away some time in the '90s. For example — and I've taken some heat for this — I do think that Woodrow Wilson's name and face should be suppressed at Princeton. Woodrow Wilson on race was a terrible man, and more terrible than he needed to be — even as a southerner at that time. He really did destroy a lot of black lives. I get it. That's a reasonable demand. I wouldn't sit in somebody's office about it. But it's so hard to see some of the reasonable demands in these slates — and I haven't seen any of these slates where there weren't a few things that made sense, because of — what looks like melodrama to everybody else; where these students are trying to take off the table something as complex as what racism and discrimination is. And so, really, they end up shooting themselves in the foot. They start out sensible; and then, they end up doing something that hurts their cause and doesn't create anything except endless dissension.
LEMON: Yeah. John McWhorter, thank you.
MCWHORTER: Thank you, Don.
LEMON: I appreciate it. Merry Christmas. Happy holidays—
MCWHORTER: (laughs) You, too—
LEMON: Happy Hanukkah (laughs)—
MCWHORTER: I don't celebrate Kwanzaa, but just in case you do. (laughs)
LEMON: (laughs) I appreciate it. Thank you, John.
